Content uploaded by Megan Blake
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Megan Blake on May 28, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Releasing social value from surplus food
Evaluation Final Report
FareShare-British Red Cross
Impact of British Red Cross funding on FareShare to tackle Loneliness and Isolation
Prepared by
Dr. Megan Blake with research support from Lucy Antal
University of Sheffield
February 2020
Acknowledgement
Dr. Megan Blake has been contracted to research and report the outcomes of this report concerning
FareShare funding and the impact of surplus food for charities seeking to address loneliness and
isolation.
This report has been kindly funded by the British Red Cross to assess the impacts and insights
resulting from the impact of BRC funding on FareShare to tackle loneliness and Isolation.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|2
Releasing social value from surplus food
Impact of FareShare on loneliness and Isolation
Executive Summary
As humans, we need to feel connected to others. For those who feel lonely or who are isolated, this
connection is broken. As a caring society, we need to find ways to reconnect people to their
communities. Reducing loneliness and isolation is socially valuable because it increases individual,
household and community resilience and wellbeing and improves public health outcomes. In doing
so, it also reduces the economic burden on public services and allows those services to be redirected
towards other social needs.
The British Red Cross and Co-op have been working in a charity partnership since 2015 to tackle
loneliness and social isolation in the UK. One of the key findings of their work is that people have
become disconnected from their communities. In 2018, FareShare received funding from the British
Red Cross to encourage community based organisations to start using food as a means to help build
community connections for six targeted groups (lone parents, older people, socially excluded people
including homeless, people with life limiting conditions and disabilities, people with mental health
problems and people with physical health problems) that the British Red Cross identified as being
more at risk to experience loneliness or to be isolated. Between 2018 and 2020, FS recruited more
than 300 community-based organisations who indicated that they serve these communities. This
research draws on in depth qualitative research with eight organisations recruited as part of this
project.
In the UK, community-based organisations are more likely to be found in areas that are more
economically well off, however the organisations recruited by FareShare tend to be in areas where
people are struggling to live with poverty. It was clear that in these less affluent areas in 2018-19,
poverty itself is a catalyst for isolation and loneliness. These are places hardest hit by austerity and
welfare reforms. They have seen over more than a decade the withdrawal of formal support
services and the closure community spaces. Moreover, the organisations operating in these
communities draw heavily on their local communities to provide access to finance, space, goods and
services. Places where there are high concentrations of poverty are also more likely to be resource
poor.
Food is more than merely nutrients and calories. Food can be used to get people in the door, and it
has commensal qualities that help lubricate interactions between people. This commensality can be
magnified when food is given time and space to be interacted with, such as through shared meals.
Food can be used as a gift and as a means to create reciprocal relationships, which enhances
people’s feelings of inclusion and belonging. Food projects have the power to enhance feelings of
self-worth. As such, food has immense social value.
FareShare is enabling the release of the social value that is currently locked within our commercial
food system by helping community organisations to access the food they need to achieve important
social benefits. Receiving a regular delivery of high-quality food that is suitable for the needs of the
charity is in itself valuable because it saves them time that they then can divert to serving their
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|3
communities. For all the charities in this study, the food service and the benefits associated with that
service would be scaled back or disappear entirely if the charities did not have access to low-cost
food in the quantities, qualities and varieties that they currently receive through surplus
redistribution.
The community organisations recruited by FareShare are repairing social connections through the
diverse and often multiple food-based activities that they offer. Different food-based activities
enable different kinds of mitigating effects on loneliness and isolation. Different activities also
attract different groups of people and provide different ways for them to become connected to their
communities. These activities will not be as effective a mechanism for connecting people if they feel
stigmatised by the way that the food or the service is framed. If charities feel they are unable to use
the food or if people are reluctant to eat it the social value that the food has is not fully realised.
Sometimes the health and safety processes that aim to protect the people who consume FareShare
food, can become a barrier that prevent people from feeling able to access the food. Surplus food
arises in unpredictable ways and often includes food items that are unfamiliar to the communities
that receive it. Finding ways to make that food more known within these communities increases the
likelihood that social value will be released.
While the specified six target groups are being served by these organisations, the focus for many
organisations spills beyond these groups because of the complexity of people’s lives and the
complexity of the communities that they serve. Volunteers and services users are often hard to
distinguish, but even when they are distinguishable, both groups may be vulnerable to loneliness
and isolation. Recognising this mutual benefit is also an important impact of community-based
work.
The case study organisations illustrate there is a wealth of creativity and ingenuity in the ways that
community-based organisations provide food-based activity to their communities. FareShare is in a
good place to help them celebrate and recognise this good work collectively. Collective recognition
not only enables good practice and innovation to spread, but it opens doors to competitive funding
streams that so many organisations rely upon. Many organisations also want to expand what they
do with food in order to create more social value in their communities. Currently many have to
devote time and effort in a bid to reinvent the wheel as they add a new service because there is a
lack of accessible practical information about what should be considered. Given that time is a
valuable resource to these organisations, finding ways to release that time back to the community is
important.
While this report speaks to the positive outcomes from organisations that are using food as a means
to help communities to re-connect and help individuals to overcome loneliness, there is still much
that could be done to support this work further. Our national loneliness strategy places much of its
focus on identifying and then moving people back into their communities through social prescribing
and transportation improvements, but it pays little consideration to supporting what people will do
when they get there. Community organisations and the food they use are vital to this equation and
more support from national and local government should be directed toward supporting
community-based food activity. Furthermore, the food industry should be encouraged to better
understand and then to help extract the social value out of surplus food.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|4
Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction and Background ................................................................................................................ 5
Research methods used for this evaluation .......................................................................................... 7
Selection of case studies .................................................................................................................... 7
Case study data collection and analysis ............................................................................................. 9
How charities are addressing loneliness and isolation and how food feeds into this ......................... 10
Identified beneficiaries .................................................................................................................... 11
Volunteers ....................................................................................................................................... 14
Food projects ....................................................................................................................................... 17
How FareShare is supporting these organisations .............................................................................. 19
From financial savings to social profit ............................................................................................. 19
Saving time and resources to enable a greater focus on project delivery ....................................... 22
Recommendations for FareShare ........................................................................................................ 23
Food, warehouses and processes .................................................................................................... 23
Messaging, information and charity support .................................................................................. 26
Conclusion: Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food ....................................................................... 27
References used in this report ............................................................................................................. 29
Case Studies ......................................................................................................................................... 31
Betel UK, .......................................................................................................................................... 32
Edlington Community Organisation (ECO) ....................................................................................... 37
Multi-Denominational Congregation (MDC) in the North of England serving excluded groups ..... 43
Laurencekirk Community Luncheon Club ........................................................................................ 48
Rhubarb Farm .................................................................................................................................. 53
Core Project ..................................................................................................................................... 58
Café 43, House of Bread .................................................................................................................. 67
Whitefoot and Downham Community Food Plus ............................................................................ 73
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|5
Releasing social value from surplus food
Impact of FareShare on Loneliness and Isolation
Introduction and Background
We are all human, and, as such, we need to feel connected to others. For those who feel lonely or
who are isolated, this connection is broken. As a caring society, we need to find ways to reconnect
people to their communities. Community organisations working with food redistributors, like
FareShare, are repairing these connections through the food-based activities that they offer.
Loneliness and social isolation are two overlapping, but distinct areas of need. Loneliness is defined
as the subjective, unwelcome feeling of lack or loss of companionship (Cattan et al., 2005:43). Social
isolation, on the other hand, is the lack of contact or of sustained interaction with individuals and
institutions that represent mainstream society (Wilson, 1987:60). Some people will feel lonely
despite having social networks, while others who may be socially isolated will not feel lonely. Both
social isolation and loneliness have negative health and wellbeing implications. Loneliness can result
in clinical mental health issues such as depression or anxiety. Those who are lonely can also exhibit
behaviours that lead to poor physical health such as over or under eating, poor diet, lack of exercise
and drug and/or alcohol abuse and other addictive behaviours. The cost of loneliness to the NHS is
calculated at £11,725 per person over 15 years (Fulton and Jupp, 2015). Likewise, isolation can lead
to what is known as the malnutrition carousel, which is defined as the recursive relationships
between isolation, poor mental health, poor diet and eating behaviours, and poor health, which
results in longer hospital stays, increased care needs upon discharge, weight loss or gain and more
GP visits (Taylor, 2018).
The World Health Organisation (2011) recommends the development of support networks as a
means for promoting good health. Research demonstrates that those people who socialise are likely
to have better wellbeing, decreased loneliness, and a lower risk of becoming over or under weight
(Lido and Reid, 2019). While there is limited research on the role of food-based community support
for addressing both loneliness and isolation, research on social eating, eating with others on a
regular basis, demonstrates it can be an effective mechanism through which to forge social bonds
(Cattell, 2001; Dunbar, 2017). Moreover, research also indicates that, by creating places with a
strong sense of belonging to a community, what some scholars refer to as communities that are
socially organised, can help prevent the causes of isolation and loneliness (Blake, 2019a). Socially
organised communities reduce isolation because they are able to regulate themselves in order to
attain goals that are agreed by the residents of those communities (Bursik, 1988), for example
reducing crime and victimisation, and the resulting fear, disorder and violence. Participation in
community organisations is expected to enhance attachment to the community (Lanier and Maume,
2009).
Between April 2018 and April 2020, FareShare collaborated with the British Red Cross to help tackle
the issues of loneliness and isolation. FareShare is a surplus food redistribution organisation that
provides third sector organisations with deeply discounted food in order to run community-based
programmes. Surplus food is food that previously was part of the commercial supply chain, but, for
a range of reasons and while still edible, is not commercially viable for the producer or retailer to
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|6
sell. FareShare has put a great deal of effort into accessing more surplus food from the food
industry. 2019/20 is set to be their busiest year on record and they have forecast to redistribute over
22,000 tonnes of food. Much of this food is long life stock, something charities reported needing
alongside meat and fresh fruit and vegetables.
The funding from the British Red Cross has also increased FareShare’s capacity to work with its
regional centres, some of whom are directly managed by FareShare and some of whom are
franchises. This increased capacity has enabled them to assist the regional centres to recruit new
community organisations and increase the volunteers needed by the regional centres to provide
food to these new organisations. Over the period of the funding FareShare recruited more than 300
charities who are supporting people who can be attributed to the six focus areas identified by the
British Red Cross as being more at risk to experience loneliness or to be isolated (lone parents, older
people, socially excluded people including homeless, people with life limiting conditions and
disabilities, people with mental health problems and people with physical health problems). In
addition to providing logistics and delivery of food to these third sector organisations, FareShare also
provides expertise around food safety, including storage needs, cold chain preservation, and
cleanliness, to ensure that the food that is ultimately eaten by those who are engaging with the
community organisations remains suitable for human consumption.
Previous research conducted by FareShare indicates that a majority of the charities receiving food
from FareShare indicated that one of their main outcomes is reducing loneliness and isolation (72%),
with a large minority also claiming that the food services they provide help to build communities and
break down barriers between groups (46%). A larger proportion of charity respondents indicated
that beneficiaries were helped to feel less isolated as a result of engaging with the service regardless
of the aim of the charity. Charities responding to the survey conducted by FareShare also suggest
that, by accessing food through FareShare, they were able to save money that they were able to
reinvest in their organisation (85%).
1
FareShare’s research shows that the charities are addressing both loneliness and isolation through
their food-based activities that are supported by the food that FareShare provides. What is not clear
is how the charities are addressing loneliness and isolation and how that is impacting on
beneficiaries nor how the service that FareShare provides enhances that support. Furthermore,
while the survey indicated that FareShare food is important to the charities, it is unclear if there are
other ways that FareShare could enhance the support that is offered to charities that would enable
them to better meet this social need. This report draws on qualitative case studies with eight
charities that were recruited by FareShare during the time of the British Red Cross Funding with
beneficiaries that fall into these groups. Case studies for each of the charities that took part in this
study are attached to the end of this report in Appendix A.
The remainder of this report proceeds in the following manner. The next section gives information
on the methods used to carry out the evaluation. Section three provides an overview of the groups
targeted and the ways that the charities support their beneficiaries, paying particular attention to
food-based activities. Section four discusses how the service provided by FareShare supports
charities to be able to support their communities to overcome issues of isolation and loneliness.
1
This survey was conducted by FareShare in the first year of the programme. The survey was sent to 287
charities that included the six groups of beneficiaries identified above. The response rate to this survey was
25% (n=72).
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|7
Section five summarises what charities told us would help them to be able to better deliver their
services and suggests some specific recommendations to further facilitate that creation of social
value through surplus food.
Research methods used for this evaluation
The research for this evaluation involved developing eight in-depth qualitative case studies and then
synthesising key findings across the case studies. The processes of case selection and data collection
are described in the remainder of this section.
Selection of case studies
A requirement for this evaluation was to conduct case studies with charities who were signed-up as
a Community Food Member (CFM) between April 2018 and September 2019 and who target at least
one of the six priority groups with their service. A CFM is a charity that receives food through the 22
FareShare Regional Centres. Food provided through the warehouses tends to include a greater
regular volume, has a greater degree of category diversity, and tends not to come from the back of a
supermarket, but from further back in the supply chain compared to the FareShare Go service. In
some instances, the food is delivered to the CFM by a FareShare driver, although some charities in
our sample reported that they collected the food themselves from the warehouse. The
organisations also typically pay a membership fee to the warehouse to access the food. How this is
calculated varies depending on the warehouse. Organisations may be registered charities, religious
organisations, Community Interest Corporations (CIC) or an informal organisation that is self-
organised. Within this report, we use the terms organisation, or charity, interchangeably, to
represent all these types of organisation.
A list of 122 organisations that meet the criteria was provided to us by FareShare. Of these, 120
were located in England, Wales, or Scotland. One charity did not have a viable postcode and was
excluded from the sample. One was located in Northern Ireland.
Because of budget and time constraints for the project, the Northern
Ireland charity was not included as a potential case study. The map
illustrates charity locations and the target service user of charities
included in the sample.
FareShare supports a greater number of charities in urban areas
compared to rural areas. The selection process utilised a stratified list of
case study organisations to ensure that organisations located in both
urban and rural places were represented. Ensuring rural areas are
included is important because fewer publicly funded services tend to be
offered in rural areas and distances between settlements and
communities can mean those in rural areas may struggle to receive
support. However, evidence indicating social isolation in rural areas is
greater than in urban areas is not conclusive (Lanier and Maume, 2009).
While FareShare provides food to a variety of charities aiming to support vulnerable people, in
practice, this has tended to be focused on organisations that are located in areas where the rates of
social deprivation are higher. To try to ensure that low deprivation charities are represented by the
case studies, charity postcodes were matched to IMD deciles and then grouped into four deprivation
categories: Very High (deciles 1-2), High (deciles 3-4), Medium (Deciles 5-7) and Low (deciles 8-10).
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|8
Table 1 provides a breakdown of numbers of charities in the sample and how these categories of
deprivation are represented in rural and urban areas.
Table 1: Location and Deprivation of Charities in the Sample
Very High
High
Medium
Low
Total
Rural
1
2
8
6
17
Urban
41
27
23
12
103
Total
42
29
31
18
120
The initial intention was to include four urban and four rural charities equally distributed across the
four deprivation categories; however, this was not possible. The final list of case studies reported in
this research includes three rural and five urban organisations. There is an overrepresentation of
charities located in areas where deprivation is very high, although there is at least one charity for
each of the four deprivation categories (See Table 2 for a description of individual charities against
these criteria).
Organisations were also selected to ensure a range of service users and food activities were
represented. Organisations that receive food through the FareShare network use the food in a
variety of ways, for example as part of a café, as meals for a specific group, in emergency food
parcels or in a food club (community pantry or social supermarket), for cooking activities.
Importantly, five of the charities used surplus food in more than one of these ways.
We initially selected eight case studies that met our criteria. We then contacted the warehouse that
works with the charity to access contact information and request an introduction. Of those in our
initial selection, we were unable to get any response from the warehouse for two of the charities. A
further two charities declined to participate, and we were unable to find a mutually convenient date
with a further charity. We then contacted seven further charities, from which five agreed to talk with
us. The final list of case studies is made up of three from the original list and five from the further
list. Table 2 provides detail about each of the organisations that make up our final list of case
studies. Please note that one case study has requested complete anonymity and so we have given it
the pseudonym Multi-Denominational Centre.
Table 2: Description of Case study organisations
Charity Name
Rural/Urban
Deprivation
Food services
Beneficiaries
Rhubarb Farm (RF)
Rural
Very High
Lunch, cooking
Older people,
disabilities, mental
health, socially
excluded
Laurencekirk
Community Lunch
Club (LCLC)
Rural
Medium
Lunch, Food
support
Older people,
disabilities, life
limiting conditions
House of Bread
(HOB)
Urban
High
Lunch, Cooking,
Food parcels
Homeless and rough
sleepers, People
with drug or alcohol
addiction, socially
excluded
Betal of Britain
(Betal)
Urban
Low
Meals in a
residence
People with drug or
alcohol addiction,
mental health
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|9
problems, socially
excluded
The Core Project
(Core)
Urban
Very High
Community Café,
Food Pantry
Homeless people,
people who are
socially excluded,
single parents, older
people, people with
mental health
problems
Whitefoot and
Downham
Community Food
Project (WDCFP)
Urban
Very High
Emergency food
parcel
People with mental
health problems.
Edlington Community
Organisation (ECO)
Rural
Very High
Food Pantry,
Emergency food
parcels, shared
meals
Single parents,
People with mental
and physical health
problems, older
people
Multi-
Denominational
Centre (MDC)
Urban
Medium
Food Pantry, a
shared meal
Socially excluded
people, people with
mental health
problems
Case study data collection and analysis
Two researchers conducted the data collection that underpins each of the case studies, with each
researcher collecting data for four case studies. The researchers were Megan Blake, who is the
lead researcher based at the University of Sheffield, and Lucy Antal, who is a contract researcher and
is involved in developing and delivering community food projects in Liverpool. Lucy also works for
Feedback, a gleaning and environmental organisation. Both researchers have considerable
knowledge of community-based food using organisations and surplus food redistribution.
Charities were contacted initially by telephone to ensure that they met the criteria for the study and
to secure an agreement that those that run, volunteer and are users of the service would be willing
to be interviewed. We also sent them a project briefing that explained the research and how the
information we collected would be used. A separate briefing was prepared for service users, which
we also sent so that the charities could share this with those who would be attending on the day we
visited. All of the case study organisations were visited at least once when the food service was
operating, although a number were observed on more than one occasion. When visiting the
organisation, the researcher interviewed key volunteers and the person who leads the food service.
We also spoke to at least three service users at each organisation. We took copies of the briefings to
share with us at these visits.
Interview questions focused on what the food service aimed to achieve, how people associated with
the service may be socially isolated or may feel lonely, how they used the food and what benefits
they saw from receiving food from FareShare. We also asked if there was anything further that they
felt FareShare could do that would help them to achieve their aims around loneliness and isolation.
Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Alongside the interviews, the researchers spent several
hours at each organisation observing the food service; often participating in the activity. During this
participation, we also had informal conversations with those attending the service as volunteers or
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|10
service users. If participants were willing, we would take them aside for a more personal interview,
where we discussed with them how they came to be involved with the food service and what it
meant to them. Both researchers took detailed field notes about how the food project was
organised, numbers of people in attendance, and how they were interacting with each other. Also
included in the data was any internet or printed material produced by the organisation.
We were asked in the tender document to consider including some of the UCLA loneliness survey
questions in our research. This survey is intended to be used as a quantitative research tool, while
our research is qualitative in nature and would not capture a sufficient number of service users in a
systematic way to be able to use it as it is intended. We also were aiming for a more open and
conversational tone with those we spoke to, while the survey questions are quite closed. A more
open and conversational approach to interviewing can not only put people at ease, but also enables
the interviewee to be able to raise issues that are important to them and for the interviewer to
probe and develop that line of thinking. We found in our interviews that these questions disrupted
that flow and limited the discussion. One of the University of Sheffield reviewers, who did the
research ethics review for this project, highlighted the difficulty and stigma associated with asking
questions about loneliness and isolation and suggested we frame this in more positive language. We
also found in our discussion that asking people direct short answer questions about their own
experiences of loneliness and isolation was not fruitful, but, when the conversation was let to take
its course, people revealed quite a bit about their experiences.
Interview notes, transcriptions and field observations were then analysed and written into
organisation case studies. All case studies covered three areas. In the first section, the case study
summarised what the organisation does broadly and then how what it does helps to address
loneliness and/or isolation for those who are involved in the service with a particular focus on how
food fits into this equation. The second area focused specifically on how FareShare supports the
organisation to deliver this service. The final section considers how FareShare could enhance its
service to enable the organisation to be more effective. These case studies were shared with the
organisations to ensure that they were factually correct. This process helped to focus the data and
provide a greater understanding of the organisation and its motivations. To prepare this report, the
case studies and notes were analysed to identify themes that emerged across the case studies that
speak to the aims of this evaluation.
How charities are addressing loneliness and isolation and how food
feeds into this
This section illustrates how the different case study organisations support those with loneliness and
isolation. The discussion first focuses on those who the organisations seek to serve, then to the
effects of participation on volunteers, and, finally, drawing out some themes that focus specifically
on how food projects help address the issues of loneliness and isolation. What the section will not
do is describe each of the case study organisations individually and in detail. This information is
available in the case study profiles at the end of this document. Where quotes have been used,
names have been psudonymised.
Importantly all the organisations recognised that many of those who used or were part of their
services had experienced loneliness and that they were often operating within contexts that act to
isolate people from wider society. Rather than target just one or the other, they focused on both
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|11
because of the complexity of people’s lives, the complexity of the communities that they serve, and
the difficulty that arises when trying to separate one from the other. The organisations we visited
who appeared to be the most effective had relatively large communities of people who used the
services and acted as volunteers. We put this in part down to the positive approach and language
that the organisations used to frame their service in ways that did not reinforce the stigmatising
circumstances of project participants.
Finally, although not all the organisations use food in all their services, having some food-based
service helps achieve a number of positive outcomes. These include attracting individuals to the
organisation because it addresses a specific community need, providing an opportunity for people to
come together to start conversations, and giving a focus to conversations based on shared
experience. Several of the organisations operated a number of food-based activities as part of their
community offer, which also helped to diversify the types of interactions people had with each
other.
Identified beneficiaries
In a typical research context, clear connections between the causes of isolation and loneliness can
be made to particular group characteristics, (e.g., older people who live alone, asylum seekers).
Across the eight case studies, there are people who represented the target groups; however, when
visiting the food services, it was clear that the categories that divide people into different groups of
beneficiaries do not adequately represent the complexity of people’s lives or the diversity of users
supported by the organisations.
Our discussions with the organisations, their volunteers and those who use their services revealed
that disentangling loneliness from isolation is incredibly complicated. In some instances, mental
health issues were a direct contributor to loneliness. For example, some of the people who
volunteered at Rhubarb Farm were there because they had been identified by local services as
suffering from loneliness. In some cases, this had resulted in depression. For example, one person
had not left their home for three years prior to coming to the farm as a supported volunteer. In
other cases, loneliness was caused by isolation, which, in turn, was caused by wider individual and
contextual factors such as living alone, having reduced mobility, being a member of a marginal
group, being homeless, having been incarcerated, or having been addicted to drugs. In some cases,
intuitional forces, such as legal rules around where you can live, also contributed to isolation.
Several of our case studies were located in highly economically and socially deprived areas and it
was clear from the conversations we had with the charities and with the beneficiaries that poverty is
a contributor to isolation (see Blake, 2019a).
“If you have not got money to eat, you have not got money to socialise.” (ECO)
In most cases, it was also clear that individuals who use the services could be categorised in multiple
ways. For example, MDC is a service that primarily focuses on those who are seeking asylum because
they were forced to leave their home country because their sexual orientation or gender identity put
them in danger. This group of immigrants were primarily black African. Both race and sexual
orientation are legally protected characteristics because people belonging to these groups have
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|12
been isolated and marginalised by the dominant society. The fact that those attending the service
are also immigrants contributes to their isolation further because they have come to the UK without
their existing social networks. The way in which the asylum system provides housing for this group
also contributes to isolation by determining where asylum seekers will be housed while they are
waiting for asylum to be granted. On top of this, the financial support that they receive is inadequate
to meet their basic needs, let alone provide enough to meet with others socially. Other examples of
this multiplicity were the older people who were given lunch by LCLC, many of whom also were
suffering from dementia as well as mobility limitations, which meant that not only did they tend to
live alone, but also struggled to carry conversations and get out of their homes. One of the Betal
residents provides a further example. She had suffered a sexual assault as a young person and had a
strained relationship with her family. She belonged to a BAME group. When she lost her job in her
40s, she became a drug addict. Each of these aspects of her past could individually contribute to her
isolation and feelings of disconnection and loneliness. Moreover, as a new event or situation
happened in her life, it did not overwrite the previous circumstance. The effects on her wellbeing of
being assaulted and her family dynamics were not erased by losing her job. While each dimension
of vulnerability to isolation and loneliness brings with it its own influences, the fact that there is
multiplicity compounds the vulnerability to both loneliness and social isolation.
Some of the case study organisations were quite specific in terms of the groups that they supported,
e.g., LCLC supported only older people, Betal specifically targets only those who have drug or alcohol
addiction and MDC only supported asylum seekers who were also LGBT+. Other organisations were
not as specific. WDCFP, for example, starts out by attracting people to their services with the food
that they provide, but they expect that those who collect the food parcel will have other issues
beyond poverty that are contributing to their difficulties. They anticipate this multiplicity of
vulnerability. What they find is that those who are in poverty do often have additional support
needs, such as mental and physical health problems, vulnerability to homelessness, drug and/or
alcohol dependency or all of these at the same time along with other problems. Here food gets
people in the door so that they can help those using the service access additional non-food services
that will help them meet their needs. House of Bread also invites additional service providers into
their café to provide these support activities, while ECO and TCP do referrals.
This diversity of need is also represented in the way that some organisations encourage a diversity of
groups to occupy their space.
Rhubarb Farm takes people of all needs, abilities and backgrounds – ex-offenders,
including people newly out of prison or on probation, recovering substance
misusers, people with physical and mental ill health, people with physical and
learning disabilities, school children who struggle with their behaviour at school
and come to us on alternative placement, older, isolated people, including those
with dementia. (Rhubarb Farm)
Rhubarb Farm was quite explicit that it needed to maintain a mix of people with a range of
backgrounds in order to ensure the service was able to reduce isolation. They felt that, if they
limited their support to one kind of group, they would not be able to create a diverse community of
people who support each other. House of Bread also sought to encourage a range of people to use
the café, which is also open to the public, as a way of normalising the space and make it more
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|13
mainstream. Both were seeking in their activity to create spaces that represent supported
microcosms of mainstream society, which help those who are socially isolated begin to feel more
connected to the wider world.
Other organisations used targeted activities with opportunities to mix across groups as a mechanism
for bringing diverse groups of people together. ECO, for example, offers a number of regular
activities that specifically target groups of people based on their life-stage (e.g., children’s before
school activities, young people’s DJ classes, meals for older people) or relationship to each other,
(e.g., family exercise classes, parents are also included in some children’s activities). These targeted
activities were designed to create peer networks and feelings of belonging within cohort groups.
ECO also offered opportunities leading to intergenerational mixing through volunteering
opportunities across groups. For example, older people helping with the children’s holiday activities
or younger people helping serve meals targeted at older people. Core project operated a similar
model. By adopting this programmatic approach of creating sub-groups and then opportunities to
mix, both organisations were giving space for peer networks to develop and become established,
while also creating opportunities for diverse groups to come together. The effects of these short
periods of coming together help break down barriers between groups.
Social organisation theory argues that social isolation is a product of disorganised communities.
Communities are ecological systems, whereby the resilience of the whole community hinges on the
ways that community norms are organised towards and reinforce shared goals. When communities
break down or do not function as a coordinated system, social norms break down, which, in turn,
gives rise to anti-social behaviour, with its effects of fear, social fragmentation and isolation (Bursik,
1988; James et al., 2004). Many of the organisations we spoke to were working to intervene in this
cycle by creating spaces outside of the home and away from formal organisations (e.g., schools,
workplaces) in order to give an opportunity for people to become part of an organised group on a
daily scale, but also over the longer term. A good example of this is the children’s breakfast club
provided by ECO to parents and children.
The breakfast club is a space for the children to complete homework, while parents have an
opportunity to talk with each other and to focus on their child without the pressure of other
household tasks. For those attending the breakfast club, according to ECO, there is also a lack of
income to provide breakfast. Evidence shows that hunger can lead to negative emotional responses
when it becomes associated within an existing high stress context and negative personal image, such
as might arise in the school context, a condition known as being ‘Hangry’ (MacCormack and
Lindquist, 2019). Acting out as a result of being hangry then reinforces the cycle of poor behaviour
and negative school responses. The breakfast club is away from the school, where there may be
existing problems associated with behaviour and attendance. Likewise, it is also away from home,
where there may be other family members and household chores competing for the parent’s
attention. The breakfast club provides a time and space that helps order the day for these children
and their parents before they must get on with the work of the day. ECO reported that what
happens because of this time spent together before school is that the children are performing better
at school and truancy and lateness have decreased, which, in turn, reduces the risk of school
exclusion. While improvements with regard to children’s engagements with school is an important
outcome, the morning breakfast session also creates opportunities for community members to learn
how to become organised, which helps to reduce community scale vulnerability to social isolation.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|14
Volunteers
One of the assumptions within the research request from FareShare and the British Red Cross is that
beneficiaries are a separate group of people from those who are the focus of the organisation’s
efforts, and, as such, are not benefitting from being involved with the service. Two important
observations from the case studies problematize this assumption. Firstly, quite a number of the
organisations purposely blurred the boundaries between service beneficiaries and volunteers. In
some instances, at the point of delivery, there was no distinction between those providing the
service and beneficiaries. Secondly, while some of the organisations have firm divisions between
volunteers who provide the service and those who are in receipt of the service, it was clear that
volunteers were also benefiting from the service in ways that helped to relieve feelings of loneliness
and connection to their communities.
Some of the charities operated at one end of the spectrum whereby service users were distinct from
those who volunteer. For example, LCLC operates clear divisions between service users and
volunteers. Service users attending the luncheon club were all over 80 and most had some form of
life limiting condition, such as being wheelchair-bound, suffering from stroke, requiring a walker, or
having dementia. In this service, users were mostly collected by a bus from the town centre, ate the
lunch that was provided to them, and collected food to take home from the food table. Volunteers,
on the other hand, tended to be younger, although still all over the age of 65, although the primary
organiser of the luncheon club was in her 90s. Volunteers were also more physically agile compared
to those who were service users.
Similarly, WDCFP, in their regular food service, has distinct separations between those who come to
collect food and receive support, whom they refer to as visitors, and those who volunteer. This
separation is maintained partly to ensure that visitors are also signposted to the additional services.
Each visitor prior to selecting their food has an initial conversation about what additional needs they
have and support that might be offered. WDCFP also said these conversations needed to be kept
confidential. WDCFP felt that, if people accessing the service were also volunteers, this important
part of the support would not function as well.
Because fostering community is also important for WDCFP and they want to address this, they
structure the space so that, once the initial discussions are held and food is collected, there are
spaces for casual conversations between volunteers and visitors, which we observed were occurring.
It was clear through the interactions between people that, as the divisions became more blurred,
the general feel of the place became more positive and livelier. Moreover, some of the volunteers
had been service users previously and became volunteers once they no longer needed the service. It
was clear that many visitors wanted to be able to give back and some did ask to help out with the
food support as they finished collecting their own, but they were gently turned away. WDCFP does
organise community meals that are open to everyone, and here there are no distinctions made
between volunteer and visitor. WDCFP also has a small number of supported volunteers who are
children at risk of offending, who are volunteering with the support of a community youth worker. In
this case, the purpose is to enable the young person to become more connected with the
community in which they live and to develop more positive social networks than those in which they
were engaging.
One project, House of Bread, uses volunteers to organise and deliver the food parcels that they
provide, who are not the beneficiaries. However, House of Bread also creates opportunities in the
space to enable people who are receiving their support to become someone able to give to others.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|15
They particularly do this in the bread-making sessions they do with homeless people on a Friday.
Here people are invited to make two loaves of bread. One is to eat with soup provided by HOB as
part of a community meal, while the second loaf is intended to be given away.
For a person who has nothing, who lives in a tent or not even a tent, to go away
and give to someone else is absolutely massive. It’s a huge positive thing
because, up to that point, all they’ve been doing is taking, taking and accepting
help and then, suddenly, they are able to give something to someone else. (HOB)
Being able to give something to someone helps to build confidence and self-esteem as it also builds
connections between people.
In several of the organisations, a person may be a service user in one instance and a volunteer in
another. ECO provides an example of this as discussed in the previous section, but Core also provide
a good example. Like ECO, the Core project offers activities that specifically target a range of
different age groups (e.g., school holiday activities, a weekly pantry or social supermarket, cookery
classes for children, community meals, and a café). Importantly, like ECO, the activities of Core are
generally self-organised by the volunteers who see a need and their community and then find ways
to address that need. One of the volunteers at Core said, “What makes us different is the fact that
we are all volunteers together.” Both ECO and Core argue that volunteering levels out differences
between people in the community. As one of the Core volunteers explained, because time given is
not paid, the distinctions between people that arise from income and need are erased.
One of the organisations, Rhubarb Farm, makes no descriptive distinction between those who are
beneficiaries and volunteers. While Rhubarb Farm does have paid employees, volunteers and
supported volunteers, employees are there for operational purposes largely and they are the people
who organise and deliver on funded programmes, such as the ASDAN training
2
that they offer, or
they have specialist skills, for example, horticulture or cooking skills, that are needed by the farm
every day and, as employees, are paid for the work they do. Volunteers are distinct from supported
volunteers in that Rhubarb Farm is paid to provide support to those who are supported volunteers
(e.g., via ASDAN or through programmes supporting ex-offenders). There is not a financial
arrangement associated with volunteers. About half of the 21 employees who now work for
Rhubarb Farm were once volunteers or supported volunteers. To help move people into a paid role,
Rhubarb Farm identifies a need and then initially provides a micro-job. Micro-jobs are jobs that may
be just a few hours a week, but which have more responsibility than volunteering. People doing
micro jobs can continue spending more time at the farm as a regular volunteer. Once the person
doing the micro job feels confident, the job is expanded with additional responsibility and
remuneration. Not every volunteer becomes an employee. Some continue as volunteers for years,
and some go on to or already have paid employment outside of the farm. Rhubarb Farm is quite firm
that, while there are these functional distinctions, in the everyday workings of the farm everyone is
2
ASDAN trainings are qualifications that are delivered via a flexible project-based curriculum with no set time
frame or setting. Those taking the training are asked to meet a number of challenges and are often supported
in very small groups. The training covers personal development as well as academic skills, such as maths or
English. The training is taken primarily by young people who may be fully or partially excluded from formal
education.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|16
a volunteer because breaking down distinctions enables collective responsibility and decision-
making, which, in turn, enhances the capacity of individuals to be part of an organised community.
At the other end of the continuum is Betal. Betal is a residential community for people who are
recovering from drug and/or alcohol addiction and may have been homeless. Betal is part of a
network of cooperative communities operating globally. Residents are responsible for maintaining
the community and passing on skills to each other. No one is paid for their work individually, but,
instead, all money is put back into the community to meet its immediate needs for food, shelter, and
clothing or expansion of the housing and capacity of the community. Those who have been living in
the community for more than a year do receive a small stipend of £7/week. People are free to come
and live for as long or as short as they would like within the community, but a year is the
recommended length of time. Several of the people we spoke to at Betal have lived there much
longer, the director, for example, has lived in the Betal community for ten years. This form of
communal living makes those at Betal quite insular from mainstream society in their daily lives;
however, they are not completely cut off. Betal runs a number of businesses to facilitate training
that can be used by residents to make an independent living when they decide to leave the
community.
While distinctions between volunteers may be more or less clear depending on the way that the
organisation runs and offers services, across all the case study organisations, even in those services
where there were clearer distinctions between volunteers and beneficiaries, the volunteers also
received benefits from participation that helped them to connect to their neighbours and to
overcome feelings of loneliness that they might have. For example, one volunteer with Core who
was suffering from bereavement said, “the volunteering has helped me; otherwise, I would be sitting
at home.” There was a similar story for one of the ECO volunteers who is 85 years old. She initially
attended a craft session for older people that ECO put on to reduce isolation and loneliness among
older people in the community, but now has responsibility for running the session once a week.
She was working in a café, but, once that closed, she felt a bit lost. She was
forcing herself to go buy a paper because that meant she got out every day. She
won an award for her volunteering and, when she got up to thank everyone, she
had us all in tears saying how much it had changed her life. How she was really
low, she did not think that she’d see her next birthday, and then coming here had
totally changed all that. (ECO)
Being able to volunteer is clearly beneficial to participants because it helps them to feel valued and
part of their community in a meaningful way. Like the gifts of bread described above, being able to
give something back, rather than being always a recipient, seems to be a key mechanism for
reducing feelings of loneliness, whilst being integrated into a community, even if for just a few hours
a week, reduces isolation.
It is clear from reading these descriptions, the interview transcriptions and our field notes that
volunteers are also often members of the groups identified as being at high risk for loneliness and
isolation. Many of the volunteers are residents in the communities where the service operates and
these are communities that have become isolating spaces. Through their participation in the
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|17
organisations, whatever their role, a greater sense of connection between neighbours is emerging in
most of our examples.
We just found that we had a quite a large range of different types of volunteers.
Some that were unemployed, some were very young, and they wanted to get
their Duke of Edinburgh awards or whatever, or just wanted to get experience.
You found that there were lots of ways in which we could support the volunteers
as well. Then, some basically were just a bit down on their luck, or as you met
with Sarah, they just came here because they needed food and they wanted to
participate in some way as well. Generally, when we discussed, the food project is
basically about trying to alleviate food poverty but also to build a positive
community as well. (WDCFP)
This was less evident with Betal, who are quite self-contained, and with MDC who draw people in
across a large geographical area. While not creating a place-based community (a community with
propinquity), these groups are connecting to affinity-based communities, Betal, for example, to the
international network of which it is a part and MDC through a shared identity and involvement in
activities that celebrate aspects of that identity (e.g., annual participation in Pride parades).
Food projects
Thus far, this report has focused on the ways in which activity within and by the case study
organisations is reducing loneliness and isolation for the people they serve, and in this discussion,
food projects have been mentioned, but not focused on specifically. This section will focus more on
what food projects can do to help reduce loneliness and isolation. The way that organisations use
food makes a clear difference in how food can help reduce loneliness and isolation.
At its simplest, food can get people in the door so that service providers can provide other support
to people. This was most evident in the way WDCFP used free access to food for those who were
struggling financially to provide access to other services as well. Importantly, providing food to
people in a potentially stigmatising way is not effective, and, as WDCFP illustrates, once people
come in the door, much work must be done to help them feel comfortable in the space. Another
example is the free food table offered by LCLC to those who attend the luncheon club. Luncheon
club attendees pay for their lunch, which is not provided by FareShare. Once a month, surplus food
is available for those attending to take home. Initially, this food was presented in terms of being
able to fill a need that attendees might have in terms of access to food, but, because participants did
not feel that they were unable to afford to buy food, they did not take it away. When it was
explained that, by taking the food, they were helping to address an environmental need that is
shared by everyone (e.g., reducing food waste), participants began to take the food, which then also
gave participants a small degree of food security. Rhubarb Farm also informally provides food to
those struggling financially, but they are always careful to frame what they give as excess to what
the farm needs and that the person taking the food is helping them to keep it from being wasted.
The effectiveness of the interventions that serve a food need is heavily dependent upon how the
project is framed through the way that it is sold and described to potential participants (Scambler,
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|18
2004; Corrigan et al., 2005)
3
. Importantly, the effects of the project and its framing do not need to
be expressed in the same way. For example, while the purpose of a luncheon club may be to help
reduce loneliness and isolation, because there is the stigma associated with loneliness (Mann et al.,
2017); calling a luncheon club a loneliness club is not going to be as effective. Likewise, poverty-
related food insecurity also has a stigma attached to it. ECO and Core, for example, were careful to
name their activities in ways that highlight non-stigmatising community values. The breakfast club
that ECO runs is called Munch Bunch and the afternoon club is called Family Fun Chill and Chat Club.
Both activities provide a much-needed meal to families that are struggling financially to be able to
afford food, but neither focuses on this aspect in the way that the projects are communicated.
The case studies demonstrate that reciprocity not only makes the exchange feel more normal for
those accessing the service, but it also helps people feel more like they have agency and choice. One
way many of the projects operated their food support was to ask for something in return. ECO and
Core, for example, offer a food pantry service (sometimes called a social supermarket). In this
model, for a small fee, people select or receive a greater value of groceries that what they could
purchase at the supermarket for the same amount.
“You’re not just giving a service, you are building people’s morale. You are
making feel like they are still something when they come in and you really do
build relationships.” (Core)
The deep discount is acceptable because the food is identified as surplus, which speaks both to the
environmental element, but also to notions of thrift which is a shared British value (Miller, 1998).
Meals were a particularly good way to connect people with each other. MDC provides a meal after
the church service as a way to connect people with others who have shared experiences. They also
offer a free food table, but participants said that the community was why they came. Importantly,
access to free food via the food table enabled those attending to have enough money to pay for the
transport costs to get to the service. Without free food, participants who do not live nearby would
not be able to afford to have these social encounters because there would be no money to spend on
transportation. Rhubarb Farm uses the food it receives from FareShare to provide lunch to the
volunteers every day. Volunteers pay a pound for the cooked meal, and, for many, this will be the
only warm meal they will eat until they next volunteer. But, more importantly, this shared meal
gives an opportunity for everyone working on the farm to come together in a shared space and
begin to forge social bonds, which is their core mission. House of Bread talked about how the café
context, which enables free access to food for friends but requests a donation for the meal from the
public, is enabling people to be able to eat together in spaces which are usually excluding for those
who are homeless. The public café is also an environment that provides a space for friends to be
able to meet with family members in a location that is safe, neutral and socially acceptable. Finally,
meals are a shared activity in the Betal community and are an integral part of everyday life.
3
See also asset-based approaches, which also advocate for focusing on positive action rather than starting
with a perceived deficit; e.g., Mathie and Cunningham (2003).
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|19
“We’re like a family, so we eat like a family. We have breakfast together every
day. All people who are on site will have lunch together. The evening meal is
together. It is a big part of what we do.” (Betal)
Activities that create opportunities for people to come together and a focus for conversations are
particularly effective for helping to cement social ties. The food pantries and, to a lesser extent, the
free food tables do offer this, but activities that take longer, such as meals or cooking activities
seemed very effective for creating relationships. Rhubarb Farm reported that people who volunteer
on the farm now also gather off the farm for other activities because they now eat a hot lunch
together. Core talked about how the cookery lessons that use surplus left over from their pantry are
helping children to connect with their families in positive ways. Certainly, the example of the
breakfast club delivered by ECO is helping children to connect better with their school environment.
Food has commensal qualities that help lubricate interactions between people. The case studies
show that this commensality can be magnified when food projects are framed in ways that build
dignity and when food is given time and space to be interacted with, such as through shared meals.
Food can be used as a gift and as a means to create reciprocal relationships. Food can also be used
to can help enhance feelings of self-worth. As such, it has immense social value. However, this
value can also be undermined or written off when it is framed by stigma and shame.
How FareShare is supporting these organisations
In the previous section, this report discussed how the organisations that FareShare supplies with
food are seeking to address loneliness and isolation in their communities. Although it is clear that
those accessing the food-based support provided by these organisations are benefiting from that
support, FareShare does not deal directly with those who eat the food. Instead, charities are
FareShare’s beneficiaries. This section considers how FareShare as a provider of food is creating
value for those organisations that access the food. This access is, furthermore, helping to release
the latent social value that lies within surplus food; food which is no longer financially valuable for
the food industry. Once the lens of value is turned towards the notion of social profit, the section
then considers how surplus food redistribution specifically enables this transformation by releasing
time and resources.
From financial savings to social profit
The case study organisations in this study do not tend to purchase food from retail providers, or if
they do, only very small amounts. For example, WDFCP only spends about £50 per month on food
items to fill gaps in what they need. ECO also buys some food, but this is for specific activities for
which there is a charge. House of Bread and Betal also only buy ‘top-up’ foods like milk. All the case
study organisations felt they needed to access a very low cost or free source of food in order to offer
the main food-based services that they provide. Some started with donations from the public (e.g.,
WDFCP, MDC, HOB, ECO, Core). Several had or still have their own relationships with local food
retailers (HOB, ECO, Betal). Some also use other food redistributors to access surplus food (WDFCP,
ECO, Core). Rhubarb Farm drew from its own surplus during times of plenty to provide occasional
meals but primarily relied on their volunteers to bring their own lunch before signing up to
FareShare.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|20
A key finding from the survey conducted by FareShare found that the food that is supplied helps
charities save money that they then invest in the organisation. When we probed this with the
organisations that make up our eight case studies, we did not find much evidence that, if the
organisations did not access food, they would continue to purchase the same foods from another
source, nor did we find that an existing food budget was being re-directed towards investment
because of signing up with FareShare. The exception was Betal, but, instead, they framed the savings
not as being able to divert funds from the food budget to other activity, but, rather, as any money
spent at the supermarket was diverting funds from the real purpose of the organisation.
With the remainder of the case study organisations, the food service and the social benefits or social
profit associated with that service would either be scaled back or disappear entirely if the charities
did not have access to low-cost food in the quantities, qualities and varieties that they currently
receive through FareShare. As such, FareShare is not creating financial savings as such, even in the
case of Betal. What they are doing, as was described in the previous section, is facilitating the
extraction of social value out of food that, for the producers, no longer has the capacity to produce a
profit (Blake, 2019b).
For the majority of these charities, the food provided by FareShare is the primary supply that they
use for the service that they offer. The volume or quantity of the food they receive makes it possible
for them to offer the services that they do on a consistent basis. Rhubarb Farm said that the food
that they receive is what enables them to provide a cooked lunch to volunteers, which, in turn, has
brought people together and created conversations (see above). It also enables them to have
cooking activities with volunteers. Without this food, they would have to go back to the self-
provided packed lunches and do away with the cooking. ECO and Core told us that FareShare food is
what enables them to operate the pantry services. The food that is left over from the pantry then
provides key ingredients to the other food-related activities that they operate. At ECO Cake, snacks
and hot drinks are offered at craft sessions, choir practice and a friendship group. For both ECO and
Core, the food supports meals offered at the before, after and children’s holiday activities, and a
playgroup. Core uses the excess to offer the cookery sessions with children, who then take the meals
they have prepared home for their families to eat.
There are two exceptions. The first is LCLC, which charges £5 per person per meal for lunch cooked
by the school where they meet on a weekly basis. The second is WDFCP who receive some of their
canned and ambient goods through community donations with another London-based redistributor
providing chilled, fresh and frozen foods. LCLC receives food from FareShare as part of a rural
network which divides a monthly delivery between a number of community organisations. For LCLC,
this food makes up what is on the free food table, which is an additional service to the lunch. If they
stopped receiving FareShare Food, they would not offer free food, but the lunch would continue.
WDFCP added FareShare because the donations and another service that they use could not meet
the rise in demand that saw the number of households increase from 30 to 60 over the course of
just a couple of years. FareShare food helps them to meet this demand, so even here it is the
quantity of food that is provided that helps them do the work that they do. Without FareShare food
they would have to cut back on the number of people that they support.
Importantly, the value of the warehouse model of redistribution that these charities sign up for is
not just about large quantities of food, the variety and quality of the food also make it socially
valuable. The pantries (ECO, Core) and the food banks (MDC, WDFPC, HOB) require variety in order
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|21
to meet the majority of the food needs for the families that access the food. MDC, which receives
food from FareShare once a month, said that there are 50 people on their books who receive food,
but on the weeks that are not a ‘FareShare week’, the numbers attending may be only about a
quarter to a fifth of this number. Rhubarb Farm could not offer cooked lunches if there were not
sufficient variety to make full meals that change from day to day. Likewise, HOB could not operate
the café on a pay as you feel model without food that is a very low cost, of sufficient volume to be
able to meet customer demand, and of sufficient variety. For HOB, the quality of the food they
received was particularly important for maintaining the reputation of the café.
“If we had to go out and spend money on the quality of food that we are giving
out, we would not be here. And, certainly, people would not be coming in. We
cannot buy the quality of food that we receive.” (HOB)
A couple of charities indicated they thought that volumes had decreased in recent months, which
puts pressure on them to diversify their sources of food supply, but of those who said this, none
planned to replace FareShare as their food provider. These services are able to continue because,
on top of the large amounts of good quality and diverse foods they receive, they also saw the access
to the food that FareShare offers as reliable.
Importantly, surplus food is both unpredictable and diverse because of the way that it arises within
the food system. Different kinds of food become surplus in the supply chain because planned
activities do not always go to plan. For example, farmers may plan for a certain volume of food to
become ripened, but weather can intervene to produce bumper crops to outstrip commercial
demand. Producers may end up with excess because a competitor offers a discount on a competing
food item. There are also times when production does not go to plan, or a machine breaks down or a
lorry is late with a delivery. For every interaction, whether human or machine, that takes place
within the commercial supply chain that ensures our food reaches us, there is also the possibility
that something will not go according to plan. This potential, when realised, is what produces surplus
(Blake, 2019b).
Food production is also seeking to meet the needs of a diverse array of consumers, each of whom
also has their own food cultures, which includes expectations and knowledge about what food is and
how to prepare it once it enters the home. There are also often foods, including fruits and
vegetables, that become surplus, but which may be unknown within a particular community.
Examples of such foods included asparagus, courgettes, figs, vegan ready meals, dairy alternatives,
quail eggs, bar-b-que ribs, and others. This was a problem for some of the case studies. One said that
the food did not always match the food cultures of those who accessed it, even though it did not
also violate religious codes. Another reported that food that might be considered ‘weird’ or which
may appear week after week might be left rather than taken.
We did have some problems because we didn't know what would be popular. It's
like voting with their feet. We had stuff left over. We had a lot of butternut
squashes one week, and I thought African people would like squashes. They said,
‘we get so much butternut squash, we don’t know what to do anymore.’ I was
also surprised about the cauliflower, they didn’t like cauliflower. Donna was
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|22
saying about how she didn't know what to do with the celery sticks, it was like,
‘What do we do with these? Never seen them before.’ (MDC)
This can prove to be quite problematic for charities, because they also value thrift and do not want
to waste food.
We also observed, however, that, in some instances, people used this diversity and novelty as an
entry point into conversations, one gentleman saying it would make his neighbours think he was
posh if they saw this food. Where someone was a confident cook, this diversity and novelty created
a space to be able to share. In another case, the charity used the food as a way to look up the item
on the internet and learn together. For example, Rhubarb Farm does online searches for recipes and
ways to use unusual foods part of their daily practice and as a means to support learning. The
children’s cooking club that Core operates is another example. What we can learn from this is that
the diversity of surplus can be an asset or a problem, but this depends on what kind of scaffolding is
provided around the food.
Saving time and resources to enable a greater focus on project delivery
Receiving a regular delivery of high-quality food that is suitable for the needs of the charity is in itself
valuable to the charities because it saves them time, which they then can divert to serving their
communities.
While most of the charities talked about timesaving in one way or another, Betal probably explained
this most succinctly and illustratively. They said:
Working with FareShare just enables us to carry on with what we're doing. We
work with donations mainly, but we still have to buy some stuff and working with
FareShare enables us to carry on with what we are doing, the restoration,
because we do a lot of things to help us run the place. We’re not funded by the
government, so we have to provide for ourselves. We don't have to run into the
shops, it’s really helpful. We don't have to worry about it. We’ve got a price list.
We get what we need the most. (Betal)
They were also quite clear that, in addition to being unable to afford to purchase food for 60 people
from the supermarket, logistically this would not be feasible. Shopping for 60 people requires “a lot
of trolleys” and would monopolise the van, which means that it would not be available for use for
their paying work, which sustains the community.
To overcome the logistical and cost implications of shopping, Betal initially organised donations from
a number of small retail outlets in the area where they are located. However, collecting the food
was a time-consuming, logistical nightmare, which still monopolised the van and staff time.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|23
At one point, we were going to individual little Asian supermarkets because they
were giving us food. There was a supermarket that was giving us 10 kilos of
potatoes, and one there that was giving us other things. We were going to a lot
of different places collecting from a lot of different shops and restaurants. It was
time-consuming because, by the time you got to one place, then got to another,
by the time you got back…(Betal)
Extracting surplus food from the commercial sector is not something that happens easily and
without effort, as Betal also discovered. There was a period before they joined FareShare when they
were very worried about whether they were going to be able to access enough food. Clare described
a time, which she referred to as the famine, as quite stressful for the director. She said, “When I
came here, we first got on, but then we hit a bit of a famine weekend. My director was losing sleep
over it, worrying where the next meal would come from.” What Betal found was that stores do not
always have enough surplus to donate, or they may change staff or ownership, and those making the
decision to donate the food may withdraw the offer that might have previously been in place.
Although front line charities and organisations tend to have limited resources, what they do have
they want to spend on directly helping and interacting with their communities. Because FareShare
handles the relationships with suppliers, collects and organises the food at the warehouse, and, in
many cases, delivers the food to those who are CFMs, FareShare frees up time for charities to spend
delivering their frontline services that are making the difference to people’s lives.
Recommendations for FareShare
We asked charities what they thought FareShare could do to improve the service. The charities all
were careful to say that they appreciated the service, and we assured them that constructive
feedback was wanted. This section builds on those conversations as well as offers some
recommendations based on our wider analysis. The recommendations are organised into two broad
categories. The first area focuses on food, warehouses and processes and how these might be
reviewed, altered or streamlined to enable that the right food goes to the right people without
placing an undue burden on the charity and without creating a context whereby people who need
the food do not feel they can access it. The second set of recommendations focuses on messaging,
non-food safety information exchange and wider support.
Food, warehouses and processes
1. Provide more support to charities around the identification and use of foods that may be
overabundant or unusual. Some of the charities suggested that recipe cards would be
really useful for things that are not considered staples. Carrots, onions, garlic and ginger
were identified as staples. Some of the charities were better able to manage the inclusion of
‘new things’. Carrots, onions, garlic and ginger were identified as staples by one group, while
potatoes and meats were mentioned by another. For some, the food was so unusual; they
did not even know what it was, let alone know how to use it. An online picture dictionary of
unusual food items with information about how to cook and eat it, what it tastes like, and,
potentially, its nutritional benefits would help charities to be able to move this food on to
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|24
eaters. Some of the FareShare hubs are also providing cooking lessons to charities that offer
ideas about how to use the food, which, although more expensive to offer, may be useful.
These should be evaluated for their effectiveness and, if beneficial, be considered more
widely as part of the warehouse offer.
2. Review processes to ensure that the right food is going to the charities to meet the needs
of the food service(s) being offered. It was clear from our interviews that the way some of
the food is packaged and its size is not always appropriate for how the charities use the
food. For example, catering sized containers of ketchup or cooking oil are suitable for a café
and meals because of the way that the food is incorporated into those activities. As such,
they would not pose a problem for HOB, Betal and Rhubarb Farm. Likewise, ECO and Core
run multiple services using the food, so catering sized containers, while not suitable for a
pantry, would be diverted to cooking and eating activities. However, this size of product is
not useful for those running only a service where people are expected to take the food
home, because these sizes are too big for people who are often walking to carry. Moreover,
they take up a lot of space, likely to be unavailable in homes of people who are accessing the
food in this way. Likewise, ensuring that appropriate food for the activity is also included in
the delivery is needed. If the service is providing hot meals, sending an abundance of what
one charity referred to as treat items does not meet their needs.
3. Review and then standardise processes to do with food allocation across the network to
ensure that they are not undermining the potential to achieve social benefits. How food is
allocated and charged for is diverse across the network and different approaches have
different benefits and effects. Some FareShare warehouses, for example, charge by the total
weight of food taken, rather than by types of food or number of items. Initially, charities in
this system said they would take anything, but the foods that they would prefer, meat for
example, were at the bottom of the list. They were finding that, by being willing to take
anything, their order was being filled such that they were not getting items further down on
the list because their weight limit had been reached. They also said that, on some weeks, it
looked as though they were getting significantly fewer items because the items they did
receive were heavy. This makes it difficult for them to plan and ensure that all their
members have what they need, which can undermine the service.
4. Review requirements placed on charities to consider how well the expectation is meeting
its specific aims and how these aims align with FareShare’s theory of change objectives
concerning social value. The case studies provide three examples, but there may be other
areas that are having similar effects on a charity’s ability to deliver services.
a. Firstly, in order to operate their pantry service, some FareShare warehouses require
that everyone who accesses the pantry scheme is given a freezer bag and a cool
block with each collection. While scheme members are asked to bring the block and
bag back each time, this does not always happen because of the nature of the
communities that they serve. Frequently also, people will bring back the cool block,
but it will not have been re-frozen. They have also observed that people will collect
their food and then don’t go home immediately to put the food away because the
food is in the freezer bag. The organisations felt that, if the food were treated more
like regular shopping, such as people do in a supermarket, they would take it home
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|25
sooner. This would also align more with their aims to help normalise and make
acceptable surplus food as shopping.
b. Secondly, some warehouses also require that everyone who collects from the pantry
scheme have a refrigerator thermometer and that they keep track and report the
temperature of their home refrigerator. This is creating a situation whereby people
feel they are being monitored because they are in a marginal situation; in some
instances, it has prevented people from accessing the food. Not only is this
reporting creating barriers to access, it is also not something that can be verified by
the staff.
c. Thirdly, there appears to be a requirement that the charity maintains a list with
contact details for all those who access the food, which the FareShare inspector can
request to look at. For most of the charities, this was an annoyance, but did not
prove to be too much of a problem; however, one charity felt this requirement put
them in a difficult position. The charity has a WhatsApp group that they use to
communicate with those who come along, and this is how they were initially
managing to communicate product recall information. The requirement to keep
documentation has made some of the recipients nervous because of their personal
experiences with the state. While FareShare is not the government, these
beneficiaries, who were seeking refugee status, struggled to see the distinction.
They feel vulnerable to being deported when they sign and provide contact
information because they do not know who will have access to it or who can
demand to see it. This policy, for this group, is increasing distress and, potentially,
the vulnerability of service users.
These requirements, and potentially others like them, are an extra cost for charities and
divert time and resources away from front line services, while, at the same time, it remains
unclear if the requirements are actually achieving their aims.
5. Provide clearer information, a consistent set of messages and induction protocols to help
charities understand what their responsibilities are as a food provider. One charity talked
about having failed an inspection with FareShare and had to stop providing their service for
a while. FareShare has helped to pay for food safety training and they have put processes in
place to address the other issues that were raised in their inspection. Their failures were, to
a certain extent, put down to not having a clear understanding of all that they had to do. It
took several months for the service to resume, primarily because of the issues the failed
inspection raised with the larger organisation who helped to support the charity. This put
the whole service in jeopardy and has resulted in the service scaling back from once a week
to once a month. Some of this could have been prevented if there had been a better
induction programme in place from the start. The warehouse where this charity collects has
volunteers do the inspections. This can lead to some issues of being over casual or over
officious, depending upon who is doing the inspection. A clear and consistent set of
messages and inspection protocols put in place alongside a standardised induction
programme could have prevented this charity from failing its inspection. This might also
have helped them to be able to understand how best to offer their service and at what
frequency. It may also be useful to ensure that the documentation that FareShare provides
to new charities is clear and easy to understand. Use of bullet and number points and tick
lists, rather than paragraphs, may increase clarity around what is expected from charities.
Something that is standardised information for all warehouses to use may also be useful.
Finally, it may be useful to check that all documents are written in plain English while some
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|26
translations for those whose first language is not English may also help support some groups
to be able to access the food.
Messaging, information and charity support
6. Partner with an organisation like the Joseph Roundtree Foundation (JRF) or the
Frameworks Institute to consider how to frame the messages that FareShare puts out
about its own mission and activity and provide guidance to charities about which frames
work better to help people access the food and services. There were several instances in
this research where it was clear that, when a service is able to frame what they call their
service in ways that are acceptable to those who are their target audience, the service is
able to achieve its aims. It was also clear that, when the framing was wrong, people avoided
the food or they felt stigma as a result of accessing their food. JRF have found that their
efforts to reframe poverty away from an individual problem associated with fecklessness
and laziness toward a more structural issue has enabled them to mobilise a wider public and
policy audience towards the outcomes that they desire. Research from the Frameworks
Institute tells us that people do not always receive the messages that are intended. There
are two areas where FareShare could support more effective messages through an
engagement with framing.
a. Firstly, with regard to the ways in which FareShare identifies itself to the wider
world. Fighting hunger, tackling food waste is the current tag line. For some, this
may express a dual purpose, to be both a social and environmental charity;
however, for others, this language has connotations of feeding hungry people waste.
This second message is reinforced in the drop down menu of the web page under
what we do, where the third item is food waste and hunger. Some political
commentators also deliberately use food waste to signal its unacceptability as a
mechanism for supporting communities. People also tend to think about domestic
waste when the term food waste is used. Moreover, as this research demonstrates,
FareShare is facilitating food services that do more than merely feed people
nutrients and calories. Much more could be made of this.
b. Secondly, provide some ways for charities to understand how to frame the food and
their own activities so that they become more attractive to those who need the
services. FareShare can help charities understand what surplus food is and provide
them with messaging that builds on shared values, such as thrift or environmental
sustainability, which can help them frame the food more positively in their own
services. For example, by saying they are using surplus food so that it does not
become wasted is also a useful environmental message that has fewer negative
connotations. Service activities are also more effective when they are framed
positively than when they focus on a lack. For example, chill and chat sessions are
more acceptable compared to feeding clubs. There are excellent examples of
positive framing within the organisations in this study and elsewhere in the network,
which could also be shared.
7. Communicate information that charities need to start and run their food services in ways
that are useful to them and cover more than just food safety. The charities describe their
relationship with FareShare in very functional terms, e.g., “we can call them up when we
have a problem with the food.” However, many of the charities said it would be useful, for
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|27
example, when they started a food service to understand how others had done this service
and what they needed to consider and if there are different ways to deliver the same kind of
service. Many charities underestimate the organisation that goes behind offering food
service and having access to what is needed would enable them to be more effective.
FareShare could usefully provide web-based briefings based on what different charities are
doing in the network, which would help answer some of these questions. This could also be
a place where charities can access information that they need to remain compliant.
8. Create a network of charities that enables them to learn from each other and facilitates
the ability for charities to share good practice. FareShare operates as a conduit through
which food moves to charities. It was clear from the discussions with all the charities that it
is not a network of charities. Not all the charities we visited, but a good number, were
interested in being able to share what they do with other organisations and for developing
connections with other services for advice, support and to be able to find others who are
facing similar issues and be able to understand how they solved them, including issues
around too much need in their communities. The Sustainable Food Cities network has been
very successful at creating a network of cities that are coordinating food activity in their
localities. In addition to an informative web site, they have staff who run workshops to help
develop local action plans.
9. Consider bringing charities together once a year on a national basis. Organisations felt that
the network could be used to support business development and that some sort of
recognitions scheme would help with access to funding. Sustain also has an annual
conference for the Food Cities network. At the conference, good practice is rewarded,
networking is facilitated, and workshops are held that cover topics of interest to those in the
network. The conference is also an opportunity for Sustain to talk about what they have
achieved and are planning. Not everyone who can attend does, but for those who do, the
experience is both useful and positive and good practice has been disseminated and
adopted. Sustain focuses on alliances, not charities, and there are specific needs that food-
using charities have that could be addressed at an annual FareShare conference that is open
to the organisations who receive food from FareShare as well as the food providers would
also effectively communicate how FareShare is facilitating the creation of social value from
surplus food to potential funders, food suppliers and the wider public.
10. Creating a voluntary reward or recognition scheme. Recognition is something that is
important for many small organisations and awards can make a difference in terms of how
outsiders view, engage with and provide resources to these organisations. Sustain operates
such a scheme for their network with a list of criteria that can be worked towards.
Food4Life also has a scheme for school food providers. Many local authorities are now
making the achievement of the bronze Food4Live award part of their contract negotiations
with school food providers, because of the nutritional and environmental outcomes that the
scheme produces.
Conclusion: Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food
A characteristic of modern Britain is its increasingly disconnected society, which is also a growing
public health concern. The good news is that community organisations are doing much to reconnect
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|28
people and give them a feeling of belonging and of being supported, which has immense social
value. Community organisations are capitalising on the connective qualities of food to do this. The
food services that community organisations offer have the capacity to attract people who would
otherwise stay at home and then give them opportunities to connect with each other on a regular
and recurring basis. FareShare is able to secure food from the commercial sector in qualities and
varieties that these organisations need, and then provide logistics to enable this food to become
available to community organisations at a deeply discounted price. Importantly, this means that
community organisations do not have to spend money, quite often money that just does not exist in
the first place, and time resources needed to provide front line activity with their communities, on
the food that helps facilitate this important social value.
The ability of the food services to exist with the reach that they have depends upon the access to
food that FareShare and other surplus redistributors provide. Without sufficient access to a wide
variety and large volume of good quality food, surplus food redistributors would not be able to
support communities to be able to deliver their food services. There remains, however, a
considerable volume of food that has lost its commercial value that could be redistributed to
community organisations. FareShare and organisations like it need the commercial sector to firstly,
understand what the wider social value of surplus food is and then secondly commit to ensuring that
that food becomes available to the redistribution sector so that its social value might be realised.
Furthermore, redistribution requires staff and physical infrastructures in order to move food on
safely and to provide the services that can enable the greatest extraction of social value from this
food. Government and philanthropic funding should focus on ways to better enable the movement
of food across the surplus supply chain, which extends from the commercial sector, into food
redistribution, on to community organisations and eventually to those who will eat it. It should also
fund projects that support the exchange of information that enhances the abilities of community-
based organisations to capitalise on the social value of food.
This research focused on community organisations that specified six target groups identified by the
British Red Cross as particularly vulnerable to feelings of loneliness and/or a heightened likelihood of
being socially isolated. While the specified six target groups are being served by these organisations,
the focus for many organisations spills beyond these groups because of the complexity of people’s
lives and the complexity of the communities that they serve. The research illustrates that living in
poverty also contributes to social isolation and can lead to feeling lonely. Places where the majority
of people live in poverty are also likely to be hot spots of social isolation. Volunteers and services
users are often hard to distinguish, but even when they are distinguishable, both groups may be
vulnerable to loneliness and isolation because they are often living within the same community
context. What this suggests is that in addition to focusing on specific vulnerable groups,
interventions aimed at reducing social isolation and loneliness should consider place-based
attributes that help to create the conditions under which isolation and loneliness flourish.
Currently the national loneliness strategy focuses on increasing social prescribing, community
infrastructure and improved transportation systems alongside reducing the stigma of loneliness and
creating better measurements. While these priorities are welcome, this strategy emphasises getting
people into their communities, without sufficiently considering what they will encounter when they
arrive. Community based organisations in order to be there for someone who has been given a GP
referral and to be able to change the local conditions that give rise to loneliness need access to
financial resources, physical infrastructures and better information about how to use food as a
means for connecting people together.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|29
References used in this report
Blake, M.K. (2019a). More than Just Food: Food Insecurity and Resilient Place Making through
Community Self-Organising. Sustainability, 11(10), p. 2942.
Blake, M.K. (2019b). The multiple ontologies of surplus food. EuropeNow, 27 May. [online]
Available at: https://www.europenowjournal.org/2019/05/06/the-multiple-ontologies-of-surplus-
food/ (Accessed ).
Bursik, R. J. Jr. (1988). Social disorganization and theories of crime and delinquency: Problems and
prospects. Criminology, 26(4), pp. 519-551.
Cattan, M., White, M., Bond, J. and Learnmouth, A. (2005). Preventing social isolation and loneliness
among older people: a systematic review of health promotion interventions. Ageing and Society,
25(1), pp. 41-67.
Cattell, V. (2001). Poor people, poor places, and poor health: The mediating role of social networks
and social capital. Social Science and Medicine, 52(10), pp. 15011–15516.
Corrigan, P.W., Watson, A.C., Byrne, P. and Davis, K.E. (2005). Mental illness stigma: Problem of
public health or social justice? Social Work, 50(4), pp.363-368.
Dunbar, R.I.M. (2017). Breaking bread: The functions of social eating. Adaptive Human Behavior and
Physiology 3, pp. 198–211.
James, S. E., Johnson, J. and Raghavan, C. (2004). “I couldn’t go anywhere”: Contextualizing violence
and drug abuse: A social network study. Violence Against Women, 10(9), pp. 991-1014.
Lanier, C. and Maume, M.O. (2009). Intimate partner violence and social isolation across the
rural/urban divide. Violence Against Women, 15(11), pp.1311-1330.
Lido, C. and Reid, K. (2019). University of Glasgow and EatWellAgeWell research study key findings.
EatWellAgeWell. [online] Available at:
https://www.eatwellagewell.org.uk/images/6KeyFindings.pdf (Accessed 14/1/20).
MacCormack, J.K. and Lindquist, K.A. (2019). Feeling hangry? When hunger is conceptualized as
emotion. Emotion, 19(2), p.301.
Mann, F., Bone, J.K., Lloyd-Evans, B., Frerichs, J., Pinfold, V., Ma, R., Wang, J. and Johnson, S. (2017).
A life less lonely: The state of the art in interventions to reduce loneliness in people with mental
health problems. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 52(6), pp.627-638.
Mathie, A. and Cunningham, G. (2003). From clients to citizens: Asset-based community
development as a strategy for community-driven development. Development in Practice, 13(5),
pp.474-486.
Miller, D. (1998). A Theory of Shopping. Cornell University Press.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|30
Scambler, G. (2004). Re-framing stigma: felt and enacted stigma and challenges to the sociology of
chronic and disabling conditions. Social Theory & Health, 2(1), pp.29-46.
Taylor, C. (2018). Malnutrition: causes, consequences and solutions. Journal of Community
Nursing,32(6), pp. 52-56.
Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
World Health Organisation. (2011). Closing the Gap: Policy into Practice on Social Determinants of
Health. [online] Available at:
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44731/9789241502405_eng.pdf (Accessed
12/12/19).
Wiles, J., Morgan, T., Moeke-Maxwell, T., Black, S., Park, H.J., Dewes, O., Williams, L.A. and Gott, M.
(2019).
Befriending Services for Culturally Diverse Older People. Journal of Gerontological Social
Work, 62(7), pp. 776-793.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|31
Appended
Case Studies
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|32
FareShare-British Red Cross
Betel UK,
Derby
Key messages from the case study
• People come to Betel with alcohol and drug addictions, but the background to this is more
complex and these addictions can stem from feelings of being isolated. These addictions
also fuel isolation from family and friends.
• Meals together are the primary way in which food helps people to heal and to connect as
a community. Through this, people are learning to be able to trust and rely on each other,
feel safe and repair relationships with family members who are not part of the
programme.
• The steady supply of good quality food not only provides ‘proper meals’, but it also frees
up limited resources that include not just financial, but also staff and the infrastructure to
be used to achieve the organisation’s core aims and to become more self-sustaining.
What is Betel?
Part of a worldwide community of more than 100 sites operating in 25 countries that was originally
set up in Spain in 1985, Betel UK is an independent Christian charity for people affected by drug and
alcohol addiction and homelessness. The UK sites provide help to about 350 recovering people, 60
of whom live at Betel Derby. They offer the opportunity of restoration to all persons who seek help,
regardless of financial means. They train men and women in a wide range of life and employment
skills, including furniture restoration, food service, hospitality, tree surgery and landscaping. All
income received goes towards maintaining and expanding the services. They do not accept
government funding. Residents do not claim any welfare payments, nor do Betel accept any on their
behalf. Residents do not receive a wage for the work that they do, although, after living in the
community for a year, they are given £7/week for their needs.
While living at the Betel site, residents or
volunteers receive food, clothing and shelter. In
exchange, they must be willing to work in the
enterprise activities (landscaping services,
furniture restoration, and café) and they must,
according to the website ‘embrace daily worship’
and ‘live as an active member’ of the community.
All of the residents also must remain drug- and
alcohol-free. Residents enter voluntarily and can
leave the same way, but it is recommended that
they plan to join the community for a minimum of
a year. Applications are made by telephone
interview, and most are offered a place within
five days. People stay as long as they need, with many staying much longer than the suggested year.
According to Clare, one of the residents at Betel, “It's a well-mixed bag. We're not for everyone. We
get somebody who might come stay couple days, a week, a few months. Our director has been here
for 10 years. We've got people in other centres in Betel who have been around almost from the
beginning. I've been here two years and four months. I've decided to stay. Some people stay five
years, eight years, seven years and everywhere in between.”
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|33
Betel Derby is located around nine 9 miles from Derby, accessed down single-track roads through
farmland. The centre is located on a farm, with a series of converted
barns and animal husbandry spaces converted into living
accommodation, workspaces, a chapel and the offices. Accessed
down a long driveway, it is very calm and there is no passing traffic.
On our visit, residents were on site, working on projects, gardening or
just walking though the spaces. People said hello and were friendly,
though not inclined to stop and talk. Overall, there was a sense of
quiet industry.
It is a closed community in the sense that it is not open to the public,
but that does not mean that there is not public interaction. Betel
Derby runs several income generating projects to provide training,
experience and a sense of purpose amongst the residents, but also to help support the charity. Clare
said: “We run a furniture business and a gardening business. We do fund raising as well…. We do
tree surgery, and general maintenance, we do everything from cutting lawns to full on landscaping.
It’s amazing when you strip the addiction away from people, the amount of talent you’ve got,
because it is phenomenal.”
Peer support and community are key aspects of the way the locations are organised and meals and
living are communal. Clare describes this as “We're like family, so we eat like a family. We have
breakfast together every day. All people that are on site will have lunch in the house together. The
evening meal is all together. It's a big part of what we do.” Delia elaborated: “The boys, when we go
home, we sit on the table and it's not just about having a meal. Come to the table, let's talk about
your day. How are you feeling? Where we didn't have that before. The cross stands for relationship
with God, but the other side is fellowship. That fellowship is so important, so important because, if
I'm having a bad day, or somebody's having a bad day, you can't talk to them. What happens, we
feed the negativity in our brains. So, we vocalise it, give someone else our burden and then they
will tell us where we are at. We are mindful of what we say to each other as well, we are all broken
people.”
Delia, a woman in her forties, who, a year previously was addicted to crack and heroin, tells a
particularly difficult story about how this community has helped her to have confidence in herself,
establish a sense of belonging and safety and be able to redefine her relationship with her family on
terms that are more equal. Living at Betel has given her purpose and a community that is supportive.
She said: “I was isolated. Full stop. It’s a vicious circle. It’s a trauma. It's really good now and it's a
mindset as well if you want to change it. If you're here, you really want to change. I know I don't
want to go back to that life, and I want my family back, and I'm only doing this once. You've got to do
it properly. Now, I've got a voice, I speak it and I'm not scared to use my voice.” While she grew up
in the UK, her family comes from India. She described a traditional household where girls were
expected to follow what their parents told them. When she was young, she was gang raped,
something she could not share with her family for fear of rejection. However, as a result, she
dressed like a lad and wore a cap. She talked about how the other women at Betel, with whom she
shares a house, helped her to feel more able to dress like a woman again. She talked about how her
father was an orphan and her grandfather abused her mother. She described how being able to talk
to the residents at Betel helped her realise that the controlling upbringing was how her parents
expressed their care for her, as they were trying to protect her. She said that, before coming to
Betel, she believed she had to stay in an abusive relationship and be unhappy because she feared
her parents would not accept her back home. She now feels that they accept her and have forgiven
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|34
her for letting them down. Delia has plans for the future. She would like to travel to India. She also
wants to help others: “When I leave here, I want to go and help Asian women. Because, when we
get married, we just assume that we have to stay in that relationship and be unhappy because our
parents aren’t going to accept us back home and it’s not like that. They shouldn’t have to feel that
fear.”
Pierre, who has been at Betel for just under a year, was a professional Chef for 38 years. He also
described how living at Betel has helped him to become a better version of himself and re-connect
with his family. “It's helped me to find another way of living. I spent more than 30 years drinking.
I've tried a lot of different things, never worked. I tried self will, never worked. When I came here
first in 2017 I don't think I was ready. I came back and it was a hard journey, a new season. I've got a
seventeen-year-old boy and I've got an eight-year-old daughter. The relationship with them now in
comparison to what was before, it's incomparable. It's just amazing.” Families are welcome to visit
those living at Betel and his children come to visit every four weeks. He says his being there has
helped them to connect two extended families and provide a support network.
How FareShare food supports Betel
Betel receives food from FareShare in Leicester every two weeks, but they also sometimes collect on
a Saturday. They described this in terms of saving them money, but, when this is drilled into, it is
clear that the real is in time. According to Pierre, “Working with FareShare just enables us to carry
on with what we're doing. We work with donations mainly, but we still have to buy some stuff and
working with FareShare enables us to carry on with what we are doing, the restoration, because we
do a lot of things to help us run the place. We’re not funded by the government, so we have to
provide for ourselves. We don't have to run into the shops, it’s really helpful. We don't have to
worry about it. We got a price list. We get what we need the most. It's quite useful.” They were also
clear that they would not be able to do the shopping for 60 people, because “it would take a lot of
trolleys and a lot of people.” This would mean that the other activities that they do which
contribute to their sustainability would not get done: “It takes them (people) away from all the
things we need to be doing.”
Prior to getting food from FareShare, they were collecting it from a wide range of different locations.
Clare recalled how, “At one point, we were going to individual little Asian supermarkets because
they were giving us food. There was a supermarket that was giving us 10 kilos of potatoes, and one
there that was giving us other things. We were going to a lot of different places collecting from a lot
of different shops and restaurants. It was time-consuming because, by the time you got to one place,
then got to another, by the time you got back…” It also meant that the van that they use for the
other activities was unavailable while food was being collected. There was a period when they were
very worried about whether they were going to be able to access enough food. Clare described a
time, which she referred to as the famine, as quite stressful for the director. She said, “When I came
here, we first got on, but then we hit a bit of a famine weekend. My director was losing sleep over it,
worrying where the next meal would come from.”
They also described the quality of the food as being ‘spot on’, with a good range of fruits and
vegetables and other staples. Pierre reinforced this, saying “I was a chef, so I know about food and
the good thing about FareShare is all the product that comes here is always fresh and the delivery is
always consistent, which is a good thing.” They did say that, initially, there was a lot of ‘luxuries’ or
‘treat stuff’ (cakes, steak), but they have negotiated with the warehouse to receive primarily staple
items. This is important because the work is often quite physical. “They're digging gardens, they're
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|35
lifting. I was a restaurant manager by trade, so my love language is food and feeding people. I'm like,
‘I'm going to feed them’.” They also mentioned receiving sandwiches, which were really useful for
those doing the off-site work, such as landscaping, as these made really good lunches that they did
not have to spend time preparing.
Betel also has a very good relationship with the
FareShare warehouse staff in Leicester. Clare said,
“I don’t need to be shy coming forward and asking
when we’ve got events. I know them all by name, I
speak to Stella, who I’ve not actually met face to
face, but I’ve met Mary, I’ve met Billy-Jo….the
delivery drivers….we’re all on a first name basis
now. And we took them a nice hand-crafted
Christmas gift last year.” She added, “So we have a
good relationship with the ladies from FareShare.
We get things every two weeks, but we have the
facilities to store food, so we go there sometimes
on a Saturday because they have stuff that’s going to go out over the weekend, and also some of the
Co-Op veg. But the girls are wonderful. They’ll ring us and say ‘is there anything you need?’ and,
when we have community events, they send us extra or keep stuff aside. We did our first wedding in
the summer, but obviously, being what we are, it was on a shoestring and the ladies really helped us
out. We always ask for staple stuff. Stuff to make meals. We get cereal and stuff donated from other
places and stuff to make packed lunches.” Delia added, “We are grateful for what FareShare does for
us. Without them we wouldn’t have proper meals.” This was supported by Clare, who added, “We
do really feel that we’ve built such great relationships with them, and we’re so thankful. I do feel
that they absolutely wholeheartedly do what they can for us.”
How FareShare could further support Betel Derby
When asked what FareShare could do better, the folks at Betel were very reluctant to comment. As
Clare put it, “What they could do better? That’s a difficult question to answer because I really do feel
like they really do what they can to cater with what they’ve got for our needs.” When pressed,
however, Pierre suggested that a more frequent delivery would be useful for them. “The only thing
is it only comes every two weeks, so maybe once a week would be better if they had the capacity to
do that. But it’s very helpful because we don’t have to worry.”
Asked if more fruit and vegetables would help, Francois said, “Yes, it would be great. Because we get
a lot of food donations and what we get is basically Greggs, Domino’s pizza, KFC, so more vegetable
or fruit would help. We get a lot of fruit in the summer, but sometimes we go a few weeks without
any.” They also suggested that support with access to a freezer would also help them because, as
Pierre said, “We’re quite limited on freezers to keep stuff.”
Betel is a place of work and recovery, so everyone was carrying on with their ‘day job’ when the
researcher visited. The interviews with two residents took place in the office and, in keeping with
the Betel ethos; they were both quite reflective about their lives and the role their faith plays. Clare
provided a tour to show how it works – it is very much a community, slightly old school in approach
with separate living quarters for men and women, and a sense of different activities for each gender
as well. Everyone was friendly and welcoming. Betel welcomes and relies on FareShare for food
provision, allowing the residents the space to be supported in their life journeys and to focus on
their own contributions to the community through the work they all do to bring income into the
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|36
charity. That is an important part of their recovery – that their work contribution is valued and has a
value, enabling the community as a whole to be almost self-sufficient. FareShare contributes to that
through the food redistribution network. In the future, perhaps there might be some additional
impact through volunteer opportunities and training (such as warehouse skills) offered to the
residents to add to their own portfolio of work experience.
Research conducted by Lucy Antal.
Case study written by Lucy Antal and Megan Blake
November 2019
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|37
FareShare-British Red Cross
Case Study
Edlington Community Organisation (ECO)
Doncaster
Key Messages from the case study
• How food is used, e.g., as part of a breakfast for schoolchildren, a meal for older people, or
as part of a pantry enabling different groups of people to receive the social benefits that
food affords.
• The food activities targeted towards children and their parents are a prevention measure
that reduces the risk of social isolation in the future.
• Offering a range of food and non-food activities enables the needs of different groups
within the community to be met, but also provides opportunities to blur the boundaries
between service user and volunteer.
• The crossover that volunteering enables facilitates connections that help address
individual experiences of loneliness, but also reduces the conditions that can lead to
isolation within the community (e.g., anti-social behaviour, fear of crime, lack of social
networks).
• FareShare food enables services to be provided that would not otherwise exist. The
diversity of food surplus is also helping to create opportunities for people to interact as
they try new things.
• There are various compliance issues that are creating barriers for some people to
participate and increasing the cost associated with the food support.
What is ECO?
Edlington Community Organisation (ECO) is a charity aiming to serve the needs of a highly deprived
former pit village in the north of England. The organisation began in the 1990s as a way to bring
different small activity groups together to be able to give the community a political voice in the
larger local authority and to be able to lobby for the wider community. It became a charity in 2002. It
is now open seven days a week with activities from as early as half seven in the morning until as late
as half seven in the evenings, and sometimes later for special events.
ECO offers a wide range of food-using activities
that address the needs of a range of people within
the village, including social cooking and eating
activities; an emergency food parcel service; a free
food table; children’s before, after and holiday
provision; and a food pantry membership scheme.
ECO utilises more than 50 volunteers and three
staff to deliver these food services, as well as
health and welfare signposting, free internet and
computer access, low-cost printing and access to
reduced cost energy supply, among other things.
Both staff and volunteers are mainly from the local area, with the director having grown up in one of
the housing estates in the village. Projects are funded primarily through bootstrapping, voluntary
activity, small contributions from users and grant funding.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|38
The director of ECO talked about each food service they offer and how it had begun because of
something, they noticed within the community. This is in keeping with the ethos behind its
conception as an organisation that would seek to bring different groups together to address local
need.
The initial focus of their food-using activity was not to help resident’s access food in an emergency
or to enable access to food; this came later as people within the village began to be moved onto
Universal Credit. They started with snacks, shared meals because they noticed that many of the
elderly within the community were lonely and were visiting the local medical centre in order to be
around other people. As a result of putting on a craft activity, which included a cup of tea and a
snack, they reported that the number of medical visits by older people in the village went down. The
director described an 86-year-old volunteer who has now taken over the ‘crafternoon’ sessions.
She was working in a café, but, once that closed, she felt a bit lost. She was forcing herself to
go buy a paper, because that meant she got out every day. She won an award for her
volunteering and, when she got up to thank everyone, she had us all in tears saying how
much it had changed her life. How she was really low, she did not think that she’d see her
next birthday, and then coming here had totally changed all that.
These crafternoon sessions facilitate social connections and a sense of purpose for older residents in
the community, which has the outcome of enabling them to live longer and better lives, but also
makes them available as a motivated resource for community self-organisation.
ECO also regularly has Sunday lunches and holiday meals for about 50 older people, which also
includes entertainment from the community choir, organised by ECO staff and volunteers. Initially
the women would attend these meals and then take the men a plate in the pub; however, this has
changed over time and now those attending the meals include both men and women.
As austerity and the transition onto Universal Credit began to affect village residents more deeply,
they added a free surplus fruit and vegetable table for anyone in the community with a hot lunch
provided on the side.
We heard horror stories from the local landlords telling us there are some people who don’t
even have pans, so it is obvious that they are not cooking any sort of meals. It would be sort
of a bag of crisps on the way home from school. (school lunch) would be (the children’s) main
meal. The parents would not have much more than crisps.
More recently, ECO started offering a pantry service where, for a small fee, people could access
fresh food. The organisation staff felt that food access was needed by people who were not in crisis,
but still vulnerable to food insecurity. The director explained:
It stemmed from the support from the food parcel, it enables people who were finding that,
in some circumstances, they did not need the free support, but they were still struggling to fill
their bellies. So, we offered the cupboard. It is sort of the next step. We have had people who
have left and said we don’t need it anymore now that we are alright. As much as we want
the community cupboard members to step away because of being in a better position, I think
there is going to be more demand for new cupboard members than ones filtering back into
mainstream supermarket shopping.
The observation that the financial situation for households in the community is not likely to improve
is a salient one. The pantry started with 35 household members, but they have now expanded the
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|39
service and 75 households now pay the £4 weekly subscription to receive food. Many were in that
initial cohort, but some have been able to move on.
While income and financial need were the key motivation for providing this food service and
community members talked about how the access enabled them to “live from week to week”, the
organisation is finding that the pantry is also helping to create and cement social connections. There
is also a clear narrative of how food-using activities are helping people to overcome feelings of
isolation and lack of self-esteem. By offering activities in combination, ECO is enabling people to be
both givers and receivers. The quasi-market exchange in the pantry is also enabling interactions that
are not present in the gift-exchange of the food parcel. The director stated, “If you don’t have
money for food, you haven’t got money to socialise.” Making space in household budgets through
the pantry is enabling people to both eat and engage with their neighbours.
ECO has also provided activities for children in the school holidays for several years and, in the last
year, they began to offer a breakfast club and an afterschool club, both of which provide meals.
Attended by approximately 30 children and at least one parent, primarily mothers, these clubs meet
twice a week each: Tuesday and Thursday mornings and Monday and Wednesday afternoons. One
of the charity employees said that, for many of the children, these meals are the only one that they
will have, as some families do not qualify free school meals.
Working alongside local schools to document the impact these clubs are having, ECO is able to say
that, for those children who attend the clubs, their overall school attendance has increased
significantly (68%) and lateness has been reduced by 12%. They also have reports from the schools
that the children are more engaged with school when they are there and their behaviour has
improved. ECO staff argue that this is because the clubs provide a calm start to the day, children are
not going to school hungry, and the morning sessions offer an opportunity to help the children be
ready for school through shared reading and homework checking activities. While directly
influencing school attendance and attainment, it is also clear that these activities are also reducing
the potential for these children to become excluded from school and isolated from their peers.
This service is also providing needed support for parents who bring their
children to the breakfast and afterschool clubs. Not only do parents and
staff help the children with reading and other homework, but they also
work together to ensure that the children and parents are ready for the
day. One of the workers discussed a situation where one parent arrived
with her child not quite ready for the day. While she made herself a
piece of ‘mum’s toast’ and a cup of tea, another parent brushed and
braided the child’s hair. Where parents may only have seen each other
as they rushed to drop their children at the school gate, they now are
providing support and companionship to each other.
By providing the children with a safe place to go, they are also
preventing antisocial behaviour. For example, one of the parents whom
also volunteers talked about the feelings of fear that some of the parents had of doing things with
their children in the nearby parks: “A lot of mums won’t take the kids out, it’s just down to the
reputation (of the place), which is unfortunate.” As such, the village becomes a site of fear, which
leads to further isolation for all the residents. This fear was elaborated by another volunteer who
said: “you’ve got these little rogues running the streets. There is not a lot for them to do in (the
village) so they get up to all sorts.” This was a need that ECO felt it could fill. They now offer teddy
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|40
bears’ picnics, lantern walks, drama and choir, acrobatics and Kid Do Fu, make-up and DJ sessions for
children and young people, alongside the before and after school clubs.
The boundaries between those who access the services provided by ECO and volunteers are
distinctly blurred. Richard, a local resident in supported housing, initially came in to get some
photocopying done, and now comes in regularly, bringing with him tins of food for the emergency
food parcels the service offers or films he has purchased for the children to watch.
The majority of volunteers are women. This volunteering meets a psychological need to be working
and not feel dependent. The director said:
Many are two years off retirement and being forced to sign on for work when they had never
had a CV in their life, and they don’t know how to use a computer. They feel that, by
volunteering, that will support what they are given. They all want to find work because they
have grown up working. Some of them have been out of work for a few years and have lost
their confidence. Looking at their age, I don’t think people will employ them again.
While these women may not ever again find paid employment, the time they spend supporting their
community is also enabling them to feel better about themselves. The reciprocal arrangement helps
them to feel not as though they are receiving a handout, but, rather, that they are part of a group
offering mutual support.
The ripple effect of being able to give and take, building up of social networks and having the
opportunity to contribute is also helping people to feel that they are making a better community
more generally. One of the volunteers is an older woman nearing retirement age who is also a
member of the food pantry scheme. She described in important terms what this combination of
support has meant to her and to the place where she lives:
Not only am I a trustee for ECO and a volunteer, I am also on the committee of the friends of
(the local) lake. And we work in conjunction with ECO so that they can have other activities
here down by the lake. Because we are bothered and we are passionate about what we do, it
has turned not only this area around, but the whole of the community. And allowing people
to get involved in everything that we do. So yes, it is worth
bothering with. And it just lifts people’s aspiration; it has
broken down barriers. What can I say? Community means
everything, without a community you’ve got nothing. And
yes, sometimes it is very challenging, but worth that
challenge because the end result is fantastic.
There are synergies provided by offering multiple food
activities. Individual activities are meeting different needs
for different groups, e.g., older people through the snack
and crafting; women (primarily) who attend the cook-
alongs to find new ways to get their families to eat more vegetables; people in food crisis who need
emergency food support; people who are just about managing, but not quite, who benefit from the
food pantry; and the mums with children who are afraid to go out with them to the park alone.
What is also clear from this narrative is that there is crossover, such that someone receiving support
in one area goes on to be a volunteer in another. An intergenerational transfer is also occurring as
older people help with crafting and cooking activities that happen during the school holiday events.
Feelings of fear associated with the community spaces are breaking down and people are connecting
in meaningful ways with each other, just as they are gaining confidence in terms of what they can
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|41
provide. Each activity contributes to an overall element of transformation acting on individuals and
the community as a whole as it connects them together in a network of mutual support.
How FareShare supports ECO.
Food provided to ECO by FareShare is mainly used for the pantry service, cooking activities and, to
some extent, the children’s breakfast and afterschool club meals.
To provide the services to its community that it do, ECO actively and
effectively seeks financial, material and labour donations from
businesses and community members. It collects surplus food from
food producers, stores and restaurants directly as well as subscribes
to FareShare. Bootstrapping involves using existing resources from
within the community, e.g., piggybacking activities that are
unfunded onto activities that are. Having access to surplus food is
enabling ECO to provide a service that they would not be able to
provide if they had to purchase the food, because the money is not
there to purchase it in the first instance.
The nature of surplus food is such that what arises may not be food
that might normally be purchased by people in this community,
because it is too expensive in the shops. Foods that were listed that
fit into this category include avocado, parsnips, fish with heads on,
haloumi and so forth. As new-to-the-community food items are offered, conversations about this
food are bringing people together. ECO is reshaping their cooking lessons to take advantage and
allow people to explore what to do with these new foods.
What can FareShare do to support ECO?
ECO was largely pleased with the quality of the food that they receive from FareShare and embrace
its diversity. They also felt that being part of the FareShare network made it easier for writing
funding bids for activities involving surplus food because they could name FareShare as the service
provider. The fact that FareShare has won awards for its service helps increase the credibility of the
proposed activity.
They did, however, highlight a few issues with how they receive food from FareShare and some of
the requirements that are creating issues for them, which FareShare may want to consider further.
The FareShare warehouse that they work with charges by the total weight of food taken, rather than
by types of food or number of items. Initially, ECO said they would take anything, but the foods that
they would prefer, meat for example, were at the bottom of the list. They were finding that, by
being willing to take anything, their order was being filled such that they were not getting items
further down on the list because their weight limit had been reached. They also said that, on some
weeks, it looked as though they were getting significantly fewer items because the items they did
receive were heavy. This makes it difficult for them to plan and ensure that all their members have
what they need, which can undermine the service. FareShare may want to consider how they order
the food selection or allow charities to prioritise some foods so that core foods are provided and
then enable a second will take list to make up the weight difference.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|42
In order to operate their pantry service, the FareShare warehouse has required that everyone who
accesses the pantry scheme be given a freezer bag and a cool block with each collection. While
scheme members are asked to bring the block and bag back each time, this does not always happen.
Frequently also, people will bring back the cool block, but it will not have been re-frozen. They have
also observed that people will collect their food and then do not go home immediately to put the
food away because the food is in the freezer bag. The felt that if the food were treated more like
regular shopping, such as people do in a supermarket, they would take it home sooner. FareShare
may want to consider if this requirement, which is an extra cost for charities is actually achieving
its aims.
The warehouse also requires that everyone who collects from the scheme have a refrigerator
thermometer and that they keep track and report the temperature of their home refrigerator. Not
only is this creating a situation whereby people feel they are being monitored because they are
poor, in some instances it has prevented people from accessing the food at all. Furthermore, this
reporting is also not something that can be verified by the staff. FareShare may want to consider
why it imposes this requirement and if it is actually achieving its aims.
Case study research conducted by Megan Blake
Case study written by Megan Blake
January 2020
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|43
FareShare-British Red Cross
Case study
Multi-Denominational Congregation (MDC) in the North of England serving
excluded groups
Key messages from the case study
• Isolation can arise from a myriad of situational circumstances. The complexity of those
circumstances can increase the vulnerability to isolation and feelings of loneliness.
• Establishing support networks is very important for helping those who are isolated to
become integrated into society, to increase feelings of belonging and self-worth, to
overcome the boredom that comes from being unable to interact with others and to feel a
sense of safety.
• Food support can feed both the body and the social wellbeing of those who engage with
that support.
• FareShare enables this food project to be able to offer food support, which offsets the cost
of transportation that many users must spend to participate in the social activities at the
organisation. The food means that people do not have to choose between eating and
their social networks.
What is MDC?
MDC is a church service that provides a social opportunity and food support operating out of a
church-based community hub. This particular programme meets on a Sunday afternoon and is
actively targeting LGBT+ communities. One key community comprises asylum seekers, primarily
from African countries, who are at risk because of their sexual orientation. Approximately 50 people
attend this service and its related social and food support, which consists of a shared meal and a free
food bank.
The Foodbank is an informal one started by the congregation, comprising
mostly tinned and non-perishable goods, which are available on Sunday or
throughout the week to people in crisis. The food bank was started by the
morning congregation, who knew that the afternoon congregation attracted
asylum seekers. They offered things from the Harvest Festival and then
carried on offering items every week. The foodbank has been going for about
eight years, initially as food donations and then, more recently, through
FareShare.
Individuals supported by this group face a wide range of conditions that
contribute to their exclusion. As recent international migrants, they lack the social networks that are
more available to those who are long-time residents in the urban neighbourhoods where they live.
Unlike many migrant communities that settle in an area where there may be family ties based on
others from the same village already present, this is not typically available to those who are asylum
seekers. The UK operates a system, the dispersal system, whereby people who seek asylum are
allocated to housing, which may be shared or may be a hostel or bed and breakfast. Asylum seekers
have no choice of location.
Recent research shows that asylum seekers are concentrated primarily around twenty-four local
authorities in areas where incomes are below UK average household income. The communities
where asylum seekers are placed often have few economic resources to mobilise towards
supporting their communities more generally and are often facing multiple threats to their wider
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|44
social cohesion. Austerity cutbacks have affected these local authority budgets disproportionately;
as a result, there is little available council support to aid integration.
Law also prevents asylum seekers from participating in paid employment, which limits their
opportunities to find and develop social networks. Identity characteristics, such as nationality, race
and sexual orientation add further to the burden of exclusion and vulnerability because of social
prejudices among the native population. One participant described this burden:
Most of us who come here, we come from different African countries. You don't know
anybody. At that time, I would spend the whole day, Monday to Sunday, without going
anywhere. When you're in the process, you're not allowed to work, you're not allowed to
study, you just stay at home. It's stressful besides the things that you will be going through
just to spend your day at home -- stressful and boring, you feel useless. It felt like that.
Some of the visitors talked about the importance of MDC as a key mechanism in their lives that
helped them to establish connections with a community of people who are welcoming, non-
judgemental and supportive. They stress inclusivity and openness to all people from different
nationalities and faiths and the food support and shared meals help this. One volunteer told us
about a woman, who was Muslim, who comes for the meal and the food support. Those who come
also make a point of inviting and bringing others whom they feel would benefit. One woman in her
20s explained her journey:
It's by luck that you meet someone who can say, “I can take you somewhere”. Where I was
living, it was a shared house, it was four girls. It's one of the girls who knew the place. She
just told me that there's a church. I was coming from Africa. I didn't have many friends,
especially in the LGBT sector. She said, ‘No. There's this church that I go to.’ Then, when I
came here, they were loving, they were friendly, they were accommodating, and then they
became my family. I've been with them for three years.… I (tell) lots of people, I always tell
them about this place, a lot. That's my first place of contact that, if you're here—this place. If
it wasn't a homely feel, I wouldn't be coming here. It affects even emotionally, socially and
all the other things, because we'd be looking forward to Sunday. It's not just about the food.
It's also about the coming here, but equally it is about the food, because you need this to
survive.
The MDC provides opportunities for the beneficiaries to develop social networks and purpose. Some
described it as a family. In addition to the social meal at the end of the service there are also
opportunities for volunteering, which some have taken up. One has become an elder for the church.
Some have also been to the FareShare warehouse to work on a Saturday. For this group, even
volunteering is difficult to organise on a more permanent basis because of the distances travelled
and unreliability and cost of transport.
Asylum seekers have no recourse to public funds, meaning welfare and, if needed, disability support
is not available to them. For some, there is some housing provision and a payment of £37 per
person per week for food, clothing, transportation, telephone and entertainment. Pregnant women
and mothers with children under three receive a modest additional food allowance. Others have no
funding while their application for support is being considered or if their legal claim for asylum has
been denied. Those who may be awaiting an appeal must instead rely entirely on Red Cross food
parcels and any charity provision available locally, such as through the food bank that is run by MDC.
It is clear that this food support is really needed by those who access it. One volunteer said, “We
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|45
know how much it means to people who don't have anything because some people, when they are
out of the system, they don't get anything at all. No support, not even that £35. This one was just
their only source of food and stuff.” Another recipient said not having to spend money on food
meant that he was able to travel to and participate in the church activities that are so important to
his wellbeing. It takes him an hour to travel to MDC. He said, “When I get here every Sunday, I
know I'll get the basic stuff, I'll get a few things, from bread, peanut butter, canned food, tinned
stuff, things like that. We really need it because it would save us some money to have that, and then
the rest of the money we manage to buy clothes and travel expenses as well, coming here.”
Once someone has been granted asylum, they are able to work or attend education, but they are
required to move from the accommodation that was provided for them. Many become carers, which
is low paying and has antisocial hours. One visitor talked about how she is now a support worker,
but still needs the food that is available through MDC. She said, “I still find the place useful, the food
useful. I've managed to pick up some things that I will take home today and cook. Then, the rest I
will buy. At the same time, I will have time with my friends and have social time and talk and things
like that.” Receiving asylum changes the asylum seekers life again completely, but the community
provided by MDC stays the same. Even if people can only come every other month, they know this is
still here.
In addition to providing a vital social space, and food support, the MDC also supports as witnesses
and writes letters of support for asylum applications and appeals. Two women from Nigeria have
recently been successful in their application to stay. It is not just the food that draws them in, it is
the safe space. One man in his early 30s talked about how being able to come to MDC had helped
him to feel less lonely because he knows someone will be at MDC to talk to anytime he needs to.
Because he was an asylum seeker due to his sexual orientation, because he is not accepted, and it is
a criminal offence in his home country. He talked about the isolation of being cut off from your
family, heritage and culture, which leads to feelings of guilt and shame. The MDC’s very open and
welcoming attitude, plus the positive reinforcement that is on view in the church – slogans and
pictures, helps him reconcile with this.
How FareShare supports MDC.
Food is clearly vital to supporting this community of people to find connections, feel safe and
survive. It is the congregation as a whole, through funding that the
church gets (collections, etc.), that pays for the FareShare
subscription. This service would not exist if it were not for the access
to the low-cost food that it provides. They certainly see an increase in
people taking food when it is one of the FareShare Sundays.
The food that is provided by FareShare is largely fruit and vegetables.
Access to this food is helping those who use the service have healthier
diets. There is also the potential for some of this food to create
opportunities to try new foods.
For the asylum seekers, the food support allows them to attend both
the social event and to eat because getting free food offsets the
money that they have to spend on transportation to get to the
church. Indeed, many who attend the service and social activity travel considerable distances on
public transportation and, without this offset; they would have to choose between eating or
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|46
socialising. The social support that they receive is vital for helping them overcome the trauma of
having to leave their home and for finding their way in a new country.
How can FareShare further support MDC?
While those who receive the food are very grateful and want it, the partnership with FareShare has
not always been smooth. They initially started taking fruit and vegetables because there is no
refrigeration available at the church. For the first year, they received food every week, with four
volunteers running the scheme. They then had an inspection, which caused them to be closed down
for nearly six months, which not only caused distress for those who depended on the food, but it
also has had some longer term implications for both the running of the service and in putting some
people off from using it. While, ultimately, the charity needs to conform to health and safety
regulations, there are some simple fixes that FareShare can put into place that can mitigate against
another such shutdown occurring.
For those using the service, having it shut down caused distress. One recipient said, “There was a
time when they were checking for health reasons and allergies and stuff and it was stopped. Many
people were very miserable. And we know how much it means to people who don’t have anything.
Because some people, when they are out of the system, they don’t get anything. No support, not
even that £35, so this was the only source of food and stuff and then when that was shut down for
those few weeks when they were doing the check-ups, it was horrible.”
The reasons they failed the inspection are as follows. They were taking the food to an alternative
location to keep it cool overnight and then to the church on the Sunday. However, volunteers
handling the food did not have food safety qualifications. They were also told they needed to
obliterate or remove bar codes, which they were not doing. In addition, they needed to provide
better documentation about those taking the food. Subsequently, FareShare has helped to pay for
food safety training and they have put processes in place to address the other issues that were
raised. Their failures were, to a certain extent, put down to not having a clear understanding of all
that they had to do. It may be useful to ensure that the documentation that FareShare provides to
new charities is clear and easy to understand. Use of bullet and number points and tick lists, rather
than paragraphs, may increase clarity around what is expected from charities. Something that is
standardised for all warehouses to use may also be useful. Finally, it may be useful to check that
all documents are written in plain English while some translations for those whose first language is
not English may also help support similar groups.
While the person who does most of the food coordination hoped that the situation could be sorted
out quickly, the fact that they had a negative inspection meant that there was some resistance from
within the church. Eventually, they came to an agreement to get fresh fruit and vegetables once a
month, while they maintain the tinned food cupboard for people on a continual basis. This pause
and its links to allergies and food safety issues have also made some of the original volunteers
nervous about volunteering again. Where there were initially four helping organise the food, there is
now only one person who is consistently involved.
For the person who runs the service, bringing the food into the church means that they have had to
do some coordination with internal church structures to get access to the space where the food is
stored. This access also contributes to limiting the service to once a month. She said, “Because I'm
not an elder, I don't have a key. But I don't want to be given a key, really, it's too much responsibility,
and I also don't want to be part of the building management group, which was another offer made
to me. On a Saturday afternoon, once a month, one of the church elders opens the building for a
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|47
support group, which involves some MDC members. They are quite happy for me to come at the
beginning or in the middle of the meeting when they are having a break. I bring the food and they
put it in the office. ...there is currently only enough support from within the wider church to enable
MDC to provide fresh food once a month. I'm still hopeful that things may change in the future. ”
Some of this could have been prevented if there had been a better induction programme in place
from the start. The warehouse where this charity collects has volunteers do the inspections. This
can lead to some issues of being over casual or over officious, depending upon who is doing the
inspection. A clear and consistent set of messages and inspection protocols put in place alongside
a standardised induction programme could have prevented this charity from failing its inspection.
This might also have helped them to be able to understand how best to offer their service and at
what frequency.
The food support was started by volunteers as something nice to do for the community and to fill a
need. There is often the assumption that to run one of these services one just starts it and it then
more or less runs itself. As this charity has demonstrated though, there can be real repercussions
from not knowing fully what is involved in running the service, including issues around food safety
and allergies, but also in terms of how to organise the service more generally. For example, the
coordinator mentioned that different cultures have different approaches to queueing, which caused
them some problems because they initially just put the food out and said help yourself. FareShare
could usefully provide information about what works in a particular kind of food service, or things
to consider, and contacts for other organisations that have successfully started similar services.
Requiring the names and contact details puts this organisation in a difficult position. They have an
email distribution list and a WhatsApp group that they use to communicate with those who come
along, and this is how they thought they could meet the requirement of being able to communicate
product recall information should the need arise. The requirement to keep documentation has made
some of the recipients nervous, particularly if they have had an appeal turned down. They feel
vulnerable to being deported when they sign and provide contact information. FareShare should
consider how its policies may be increasing the distress and vulnerability of service users and work
to find ways to reduce this stress.
Finally, it is not always clear to charities what food will be available as surplus. While they do
understand that what will be included will be variable according to categories and that it may be
close to the use by date, they do not always grasp that foods that one group of people see as normal
may not seem so for other groups. The coordinator said:
We did have some problems because we didn't know what would be popular. It's like voting
with their feet. We had stuff left over. We had a lot of butternut squashes one week, and I
thought African people would like squashes. They said, ‘we get so much butternut squash,
we don’t know what to do anymore.’ I was also surprised about the cauliflower, they didn’t
like cauliflower. (Name suppressed) was saying about how she didn't know what to do with
the celery sticks, it was like, ‘What do we do with these? Never seen them before.’
The organiser for this charity felt that recipe cards would be really useful for things that are not
considered staples. Carrots, onions, garlic and ginger were identified as staples.
Case study research conducted by Lucy Antal
Case study written by Megan Blake and Lucy Antal
January 2020
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|48
FareShare-British Red Cross
Laurencekirk Community Luncheon Club
Laurencekirk, Scotland
Key messages from the case study
• While continuing to live one’s own in one’s own home can be a source of pride, for those
who are elderly and have mobility limitations this can also be a source of isolation and
loneliness. Isolation can manifest itself as being shut-in and dependant on the schedules
of others who provide care for human contact.
• Older people with dementia struggle to carry on a conversation, but it is clear that eating
together and being in the same space as peers are important for reducing the feelings of
isolation that arise from this condition.
• Acceptance of surplus food is dependent upon its framing. People are more likely to
accept if it is not framed as charity, but as supporting the environment. Acceptance is also
linked to wider social expectations about the food.
• For people who are retired, but still active, volunteering can be a good way to stay
connected to the community and involved in village life, thereby minimising the likelihood
of becoming isolated. The food collection activities run by volunteers is an example of
how FareShare is supporting people to maintain their role in the community and stay
connected.
The Location
Laurencekirk is a small community about half way between Dundee and Aberdeen. The surrounding
area is agricultural land, where it is clear farming is still going on. The village is served by a bus
service and rail services that extend to both cities as well as Edinburgh. The Laurencekirk
Community Learning Officer told me that the village has become
much more of a commuter village over the last 15 or so years.
There are four community halls in the village and the local school
also helps serve community needs. The luncheon club is held at
this school, which is located up a hill on the edge of town. The
community centres offer several parent and child activities as well
as activities for elderly people, including a lift service that helps
older people do their shopping. In the town, there is a
cooperative supermarket, located near an industrial area and the train station. The convenience
store is in the centre of town and has only a limited number of items available for
sale. Food purchasing in the village is limited to these stores, a couple of cafés, a
takeaway, and two pubs. There is a supported residential home and several small
developments with bungalows.
CFine runs FareShare Grampian, located in Aberdeen, which is about an hour’s
drive away. They deliver food to Laurencekirk on the third Wednesday of every
month. The food is then collected by volunteers from different communities. This delivery was
requested and organised by the Mearns Area Partnership (MAP) as a way of getting surplus food
into very rural areas of Scotland, which is why it is available to Laurencekirk. Others who collect and
take the food to their communities similarly distribute the food to targeted groups in the
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|49
community. There is a focus on vulnerable older people, for example, those with physical and
mental health issues and the families of primary school children who are struggling financially. In
these instances, the food will be made available at parents’ evenings or after school. This
distribution is part of a wider strategy to make the food generally more acceptable so that those
who do struggle financially will not feel targeted and ashamed of the food they receive. The
environmental and thrift messages are used to help to enhance the attractiveness of the food.
The Lunch Club
The lunch club is organised by Mrs. MacPhearson, who has been coordinating this for approximately
the past 15 years. She is 90 years old. The club was originally organised by the Healthy Living
Network, but Mrs. MacPhearson took it over and has been organising it ever since. The community
support officer sees the fact that Mrs. MacPhearson does this as an example of a self-organised
activity. The lunch club meets every Friday. When school is not in session, they meet at the local
pub/hotel, but all agreed they preferred to eat at the school, as the space was easier to get around
in. Lunch starts at 12 and finishes about 1:30 pm.
The meal is prepared by the primary school and is not the same food that is eaten by the children,
although it is traditional fare. We had soup and mince and tatties with bread, carrots and peas,
followed by some biscuits and scones made by one of the volunteers and tea/coffee. The cost to
attend is £5 per person and this covers the cost of the meal and space rental. The meal is served in a
new building that was initially constructed to provide after and before school activities. This money
is collected at the end of the meal in a tin that is passed around. However, the cost of the meal has
gone up over the years and there is some concern that it is getting too expensive for some people.
There are two groups involved with the lunch club, those who are the service users and the
volunteers. There are usually about 15 people in attendance (three men, 12 women) as service
users, all of whom are over the age of 85. According to the volunteers, many of those who eat have
dementia. While, in many organisations, people who use services usually start as an eater and then
go on to become volunteers, this is not the case for this group. There was not a lot of conversation
over the lunch. It was clear when I asked questions that they needed to think in order to get their
words together before answering. People generally ate all their food. It was felt that a hot meal was
important, as many do not really bother too much when they are on their own. Everyone comes
well dressed. This is clearly an outing for them, and they all said that they enjoyed the company.
Eaters live either in their own homes or in an assisted living residential home. The lunch club usually
has a bus that they use to transport eaters to the school; however, on this occasion it had broken
down. Fortunately, they had been able to borrow the van from the assisted living location, but this
is not a long-term solution and is causing Mrs. MacPhearson some anxiety. Although the town is
small and it is not very far from the town centre to the school, there is a bit of a hill and it would
prove impossible for most participants to come without this transportation as most of the
participants had some sort of walker to help them get about. It was clear that having a bus or taxi
that would take these people where they wanted to go is important to these residents. It is very
difficult for them to go even very short distances. The lunch club is a way for them to get out of the
house and the transport is what enables them to do this.
There is also a rota of volunteers who come along to the club once a month to set up, to serve and
to clean up afterwards. Volunteering activity is very much a part of village life alongside dance clubs
and arts clubs and this is coordinated through the village halls, medical centres and library. It is also
seen as an older age life stage—moving from volunteering into service users as ageing occurs.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|50
Mrs. MacPhearson comes every time. She also sets the rota and pays the school. Volunteers are
primarily retired women in their late 60s up to their 70s. One of these volunteers, Shirley, also
brings the FareShare food delivery once a month and sets up on a table for those attending to
choose what they want to take home with them. Volunteering is an important way for people to
remain connected to their communities and to feel that they still have purpose.
There are four volunteers each week who arrive about 11:30 and set the tables into two squares
with a side table for Eleanor, who is in a wheelchair, along one of the squares. There is an also a
separate table that the volunteers use to eat their own lunch. While they all knew each other, there
was a clear distinction between those volunteering and those coming to the lunch. The volunteers,
and particularly Mrs. MacPhearson, welcome the guests and help them get settled in, arranging
coats and handbags over the backs of chairs, moving walkers out of the way and getting drinks.
People sit in regular groups, with those from the assisted living place sitting together.
Attendance at the lunch club means also that. if someone does not show up, Mrs. MacPhearson
would check up on them.
How FareShare food supports Laurencekirk luncheon club
Surplus food is not part of the lunch. The food is, instead, a side element to the club that happens
once a month. The food is ambient food, primarily canned or dried items that are staples and snacks
and tea. Generally, no vegetables are included in the delivery.
The food is not something that those in the luncheon club particularly felt that they needed and
were clear that, while it was nice to have, it was not necessary for their survival. Although, when
talking to them about shopping, it was clear that this is quite difficult for many and having the staple
items means that there is food in the cupboard should they need it and it is incorporated into their
regular cooking.
Shirley told me that some of the participants were initially reluctant to take the food because they
felt that it would signal they needed help. When it was re-framed to them that this was food that
would otherwise be wasted, the acceptability of the food increased and now more are taking food
home. What is not taken by the elderly people (usually 2-3 trays), Shirley takes to the community
centre and leaves for a self-help group. She says that, when she returns to collect the trays, the food
has always been taken. This other group declined to meet with me.
The luncheon club is not dependent on the food and it does not form part of their main purpose.
They club would continue without the food and the food does not save them money for other
activities. It is an added-on service and they were invited to take the food, rather than asking for
themselves to be included in the scheme. When asked if they would want to continue, Shirley said
that she thought it was a good idea and worth doing, so she was happy with what is going on.
When discussing the food with some of the service users, the topic of new foods arose. The most
recent example was Broccoli chips, which were a new food to everyone who tried them. Some
thought they were good, others did not like them but thought their daughter/son might. No one felt
that the chips would be something that they would purchase in the future.
While the food is not integral to the workings of this organisation and the way that it is addressing
isolation and loneliness amongst older people, what is also clear is that volunteering helps people to
maintain their community connections and to feel useful. The process of sorting and delivering the
food, while not having a direct impact on a large number of people, is helping to maintain those
connections.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|51
Further information about some of the eaters who attend the club
Eleanor
Eleanor uses a wheelchair and is paralysed on the left side of her body. She is 92. She still lives in
her own bungalow and has carers feed her mid-day and in the evening. The rest of the time, she is
on her own at home. The lunch club provides her with an opportunity to get out of her home. She
arrives by a special taxi. Her nephew also lives nearby, and he comes to see her occasionally. When
she is at home, during the day her door is unlocked so that the support workers can let themselves
in, but she is a bit worried about this. The lunch club is important to her because it gets her out of
the house. Eleanor told me she sometimes feels lonely. Eleanor used to sew quite a bit but cannot
do this now because she cannot move her left hand. Eleanor was very proud that she still owns her
own home. She struggled to speak because of the effects of the stroke and apologised for her dinner
manners (sometimes food fell off the fork).
Margaret
Unlike most of the other participants, Margaret drives herself to the lunch club. She began
attending on the invitation from Mrs. MacPhearson, who seems to have been the force behind
recruiting people. Margaret seemed the most able of those who attend, slightly younger and more
alert. She seemed to have more in common with the volunteers. She lives on her own since her
husband died and has been attending the club for about six months. Since 1990, she has lived on an
estate near to the village and seems to have fallen out with someone who is important in the
resident’s association, which is making life difficult for her. She is thinking about moving to the
assisted living facility where several of the others who attend the club live and whom she had met
through the club. Margaret has also been involved in teaching the children from the school to knit.
This is something she did with the children for about six weeks after the lunch was finished. She said
there were two groups of children who did this, mixed boys and girls. They made squares, but she
hopes to be able to teach them some more after the school holidays. She started doing this because
someone from the school asked if anyone knew how to knit and if they would like to help the
children learn. Margaret feels quite isolated in the estate where she lives, not only because she
does not get on with one of the people, but also because there is not much on the estate –no shops,
just houses.
Robert
Robert has three children who are grown. His wife has passed away. One of his children and his wife
lives with him, but the other two are in the South West of the US (Colorado and Utah). Robert has
spent some time working in these two places when he was younger. He was very quiet over lunch,
but enjoyed being part of a group. After lunch, he was going to go home and watch gardening
shows on the television. He had enjoyed gardening when he was younger. Robert still wears his
wedding ring. At home, his children cook for him, and he spends time with them, but he felt it was
good to be able to get out of his home and see his peers.
How FareShare could further support Laurencekirk Luncheon Club
Receiving more food is not going to support this club particularly because the school cooks the meals
and that works for them. There was some discussion about the rising cost of the food, and one might
think that this could potentially be replaced with surplus, but age and health issues make these
people quite vulnerable to foodborne illness, so foods that are chilled that may be more suitable for
fresh meals might introduce risk. In addition, unless a volunteer is willing to step forward, do the
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|52
cooking and find a new location where they can eat and cook the meal, preparing the meals
themselves is not an option.
This organisation is playing an important role in the wider context of surplus food use within the
area. It is helping make the food acceptable to those who are in financial difficulty. It is also
supporting older people who struggle to get out of the house to be able to have food at hand and to
reduce the burden of shopping. FareShare could support this effort more by helping with some of
the messaging it is using about surplus food (e.g., stop calling it food waste for hungry people).
It was clear when I asked if there was anything that FareShare could do; Shirley answered this
question with CFine in mind, not FareShare UK. She felt that CFine had a lot to give, but, given the
rural nature and size of the area, they would not want to be a burden on them. It was evident from
her response that more could be done to explain to those using the food how FareShare works and
what FareShare UK might be able to bring to the table in terms of further support.
Volunteering is clearly an important part of this community and supporting volunteering
opportunities for older people in their communities would help be a preventative measure that
could reduce increased isolation and loneliness amongst older people.
Case study research conducted by Megan Blake
Case study written by Megan Blake
October 2019
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|53
FareShare-British Red Cross
Rhubarb Farm
Langwith
Key messages from the case study
• People experiencing loneliness and isolation are not singular in their characteristics. For
example, they may have a very limited income, experience learning or behavioural issues,
and live in an isolated location.
• Food can be used in many ways to tackle loneliness and isolation. The key is the way in
which it creates opportunities for people to interact with each other and begin
conversations.
• The food supplied by FareShare is contributing to the mission and purpose of Rhubarb
Farm through the way that it is used to bring people together to start those conversations.
The meals are also helping people to maintain a healthier diet, which, in turn, enables
them to engage more fully in the other activities at the farm.
• The pound that the volunteers pay for the meal funds its supply, but, in return, they
receive food that it of higher quality, more nutritious and enables friendships to flourish.
What is Rhubarb Farm?
Rhubarb Farm was started in 2009 by Jennie Street, who saw that a wide range of vulnerable people
were falling through the nets of the various agencies supposed to help them and that social
isolation, mental ill health and a range of other issues were obstacles to integration, health and
resilience. She wanted to address some of these problems by establishing an organisation to engage
hard-to-reach people and provide more holistic, flexible and intensive support to enable people to
improve their lives. She set Rhubarb Farm up as a Community Interest Company (CIC)
4
in order to
achieve this goal and to enable sustainability.
The farm grows vegetables organically, flowers and keeps
chickens. There are also pigs in residence for part of the year.
The produce and eggs are sold to the Welbeck Estate Farm shop,
pubs and restaurants, and to customers who collect a weekly veg
bag. The farm also has weekend pick-your-own events for local
residents and hosts school visits so the children can see how food
grows. Each day volunteers and staff take turns to cook lunch for
all those on site and the farm runs a Community Café providing
a meal for 15 older people, whom they collect from the local
villages every Monday. All meals are cooked using FareShare food and farm produce. There is also a
forest school.
4
CIC’s are not-for-profit social enterprises, whose primary purpose is to provide a social good. All CICs are
asset-locked in the same way as charities (i.e. the directors cannot take money from the enterprise in the form
of dividends), and all profits are used for the work of the enterprise
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|54
Rhubarb Farm supports about 100 people who are referred to them as volunteers to acknowledge the
contribution they make to the farm, and to give them a sense of self-worth. The Farm employs 21
people, of whom 13 had previously been volunteers.
Volunteers coming to Rhubarb Farm can engage in a
wide range of activities—from participating in the
Men in Shed project, where woodworking and
crafting takes place, cooking lunch or making
chutneys, sauces and jams for the veg boxes, and
tending the chickens. The farm is currently running
a Food Project commissioned by Bassetlaw District
Council through Bassetlaw Clinical Commissioning
Group and financed by Public Health,
Nottinghamshire County Council. This involves
encouraging people to learn about healthy eating,
cooking and food groups in order to give them the confidence needed to make some changes to
their eating habits. The farm is also an ASDAN training centre where students who struggle with
formal schooling can improve their English and Maths skills and also learn other essential life skills,
including healthy eating and cooking. At the centre of all this is the core activity of therapeutic
horticulture.
Film actors often say ‘rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb’” to represent the sound of several simultaneous
conversations going on in the background and this is what Jennie aims to grow—the sound of people
having multiple, simultaneous conversations—joking, learning, but also talking through their issues.
It is these opportunities to talk and engage with others that are the primary produce of Rhubarb
Farm and overshadow the material products that are produced. Jennie said, “We could grow more if
we just farmed in a more traditional way. But we have what is known as therapeutic loss, because
the people who come generally need to learn how to farm…What we are is a family that is enabling
people who need support to find a purpose and be productive.”
Volunteers at Rhubarb Farm are, indeed, diverse. There are people with physical and learning
difficulties, recovering drug and alcohol users, people with mental and physical ill health, teenagers,
older isolated people, people doing Community Payback and ex-offenders.
Anita, the Farm Manager, explained that, despite this diversity, most have become isolated or
excluded from mainstream society and struggled to make friends in their daily lives prior to coming
to Rhubarb Farm as a volunteer. For example, she explained that those who come as supported
volunteers through the ASDAN programme may still attend regular school part-time or may have
been excluded. At school, they are usually quite isolated and do not mix with the other children. But,
she said that, once they come to Rhubarb Farm, they do not demonstrate the issues that they
present at school. However, while there are quite a few young people referred from schools, these
are a minority. The majority of volunteers come from this rural and highly deprived ex-mining area
and its small communities. These volunteers are referred by friends, family or social services
because of concerns for their wellbeing. Some also self-refer because the farm is now well known in
the area, with a good reputation for supporting people in a non-judgemental way.
Through their engagement with the farm, friendships are formed, some of which extend beyond the
farm. For example, a group attends car boot sales together, while others meet on online gaming
platforms. However, coming to the farm is their primary social life and they love it. As Jennie noted,
some are creating their own niches, for example, Bess and Louise grow flowers together that not
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|55
only enhance the farm itself, but also are picked and sold in the Welbeck Estate Farm shop that is
nearby. Louise, who is 81, moved to the area to be near her daughter, but, because it is so rural in
this part of Derbyshire, she found herself feeling very alone. Coming to the farm really helps her.
Likewise, Matt came to the farm as an ex-offender and loves to cook, which he learnt to do from his
mother. He is now a full-time employee, organises the Community Cafe meals, the daily hot lunch
for the volunteers, and coordinates chutney, jam and sauce making for the veg boxes. Nicholas, who
was originally a volunteer who struggled with mental health issues, is now employed by the farm,
and has responded to the suggestion of some of the volunteers to refurbish one of the sheds to
make a forestry school at the bottom of the site. ii
For some of the volunteers, like Matt and Nicholas, for whom the farm offers a pathway into
employment, this might start as a micro-job, just a few hours a week. Then, as their confidence
grows, so does the employment. For example, one of the current volunteers will be working on a
Community Pantry scheme that draws on surplus food delivered by FareShare East Midlands and will
be available to the volunteers for a small subscription. Initially, this job will be just a few hours a
week.
Many of those who attend as volunteers struggle to eat regular meals that are healthy at home. The
lunches that they eat together at Rhubarb Farm, made from the FareShare delivery, are, for many,
the only warm or freshly cooked meals they eat. For some, this is because they are not interested in
cooking, but, for others this is because their experiences of drug and/or alcohol use, incarceration,
health and/or learning difficulties have meant that employment has been hard to find or cope with,
and their incomes are insufficient to help them meet their food and nutritional needs. By feeding
those who work on the farm, and helping them to maintain healthier diets than they can on their
own, the farm is ensuring that the volunteers are also physically able to engage in the activities that
they do at the farm and get the most out of them. Not only is the farm providing people with a
route into a more meaningful and fulfilled life experience, but it is also feeding them as they take
that journey.
How FareShare food supports Rhubarb Farm.
It is odd to think that a place that grows and sells food might need the support of surplus food as
well. Wouldn’t they just do what they already do if the food were not available? Anita assured me
that the FareShare food that is
delivered every two weeks is a
vital and integral resource for
the farm and they have plans
to increase this to a weekly
delivery once the Community
Pantry is up and running.
However, the key way that the
food matters is how it is
incorporated into so many
different cooking activities.
Those who are doing the
ASDAN programme have cooking and healthy eating as part of the bronze, silver, gold accreditation
or they can focus on food as a unit (Foodwise). For example, David, supported by Anita, made red
pepper soup from donated peppers that was then eaten by about 30 volunteers at lunchtime.
Jonathan, whose normal diet is very bad, and who doesn't normally eat with other volunteers, is
doing the Foodwise unit as a way to improve his diet. He has been helped to use FareShare potatoes
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|56
to make oven-baked chips, which were then also eaten by other volunteers. Speaking to Jonathan, it
is clear that his dietary choices and favourite foods are not healthy for him, but he said he really
enjoyed the chips and would have them again.
The random nature of surplus food means also that those working and volunteering in the kitchen
are learning to plan and to do research about these foods. They see what comes in and then work
out what might be combined to make meals that people will enjoy, for example, the way cereal was
made into cornflake pie for the Monday Community Cafe meal. When the delivery arrives, those
who help with this learn how to store different kinds of foods, how surplus food arises and the value
of circular economies.
The main contribution of the FareShare food, however, is when volunteers are eating the lunch
itself. When observing the lunch, you see lots of mixing and conversation. People are eating
together who may not necessarily be working together in the same activity during the day. Meals
are hearty and include vegetables, but also proteins and starches, for example, pasta with a meat-
based tomato sauce, or fish pie, salad and a dessert. The comments they make clearly indicate that
people enjoy eating the food. The real key here is not the financial benefit though, but what the hot
meal offers in terms of enabling a social connection. Before they started getting the food from
FareShare, they did not cook every day, but only when there were surplus vegetables from the farm,
which were made into soups. On the days when there were no meals, everyone brought a packed
lunch and did not mix so much at lunchtime. The difference here is that as the hot, cooked lunch is
plated and served over a counter, people queue up and that creates an opportunity to talk. They
then sit and eat together at the tables. Anita said they could not feed 30-40 people every day
without FareShare food and the pound that everyone pays for the meal covers the cost of the
FareShare subscription. Buying the food in would be too expensive and the volunteers could not
afford to pay more than they currently give for the meal.
None of the food goes to waste. If it is short-dated, it is frozen. If there are leftovers, these are
packed up and given to people who Rhubarb Farm knows are struggling. This gifting is always done
in a very dignified way and the fact that it is surplus helps this process. For example, if there is a lot
of a particular item, staff can say, “I have loads of cereal this week, we’ll never manage to use all
this. Could you use some cereal?” The volunteers would not ask, but they are very willing to take
the excess.
How can FareShare further support Rhubarb Farm?
Both Anita and Jennie had a number of ideas about how FareShare could support them more in
what they are doing. Both felt that they would benefit from being able to know what other charities
are doing with the surplus and how they are supporting their communities. They would also like the
opportunity to show others what they do on the farm. They thought an ability to exchange ideas
and talk to others about how they carry out particular food activities would help them understand
how they might offer more. We talked quite a bit about how to run a Community Pantry, and some
general information about the various ways that others are running their own pantries, what works,
and what does not.
At certain times of the year, Rhubarb Farm has excess produce that it struggles to eat or sell. Green
beans, swedes, and potatoes are currently in glut. When this happens, they tend to give the food to
a nearby petting zoo for animal feed. They would also really like to be able to offer the surpluses to
other charities, which are supporting their communities. They said that, if there was a way to
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|57
transport it, perhaps if FareShare would be willing to take it on a return journey, they would be
happy to donate the food.
Finally, recognition is something that is important for charities and CICs and awards can make a
difference in terms of how outsiders view, engage with and provide resources to these
organisations. Jennie felt that it would be helpful if FareShare, individually or in collaboration with,
for example the Big Lottery, had a recognition scheme to both celebrate the donors to FareShare
(food manufacturers, supermarkets, etc.) and the organisations that help them to create social
benefit from surplus food. A yearly conference with an awards ceremony would also offer up the
chance to network with other surplus food-using charities. Including some participation by public
health, food alliances and national charities (e.g., Sustain, Incredible Edible, Church Action on
Poverty, British Red Cross), funders, and industry would also help them to expand their professional
networks.
Case study research conducted by Megan Blake
Case study written by Megan Blake
October 2019.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|58
FareShare-British Red Cross
Core Project
Birkenhead
Key messages from the case study
• Isolation is not just a characteristic of certain demographic variables, such as age or life
course status (e.g., being a single parent or retired). Poverty-related isolation intersects
with life course circumstances to exacerbate the experience, because it removes the
ability to afford opportunities to interact with others in ways that are available to people
that are more affluent (e.g., going out to socialise at a pub, seeing a film).
• While services may have specific target audiences whose needs are met (e.g., lack of food
to eat), volunteers also benefit from participation in delivering the activities. These
benefits include feeling part of a community of people who are supporting each other,
increasing self-worth through having skills recognised and engaging in regular social
interactions that provide both a structure to the week and a focus for developing shared
understanding.
• While food gets people in the door, how it is used and the combinations of uses produce a
context that can shift feelings of stigma and social exclusion into feelings of having control
over one’s life, purpose and belonging.
What is Core Project?
Core Project is a multi-activity community hub that provides food and other
services as a way to be a catalyst for local resilience by reducing isolation
and enabling people to get back on their feet after a period of difficulty.
Among the activities they provide are holiday activities that include a hot
meal for up to 80 local children, low cost meals, a weekly social supermarket
or pantry, special occasion community meals, children’s cookery classes,
emergency food parcels to approximately 80 people a month and homeless
support. They reported providing 1700 free hot meals to children in the
summer of 2019. Alongside this, they offer activities such as bingo, Christmas jumble sales, advice
support and voluntary opportunities.
Core Project takes a cross-generational approach to their services, ensuring there are activities
available for all ages throughout the week. For example, the bingo meal targets older people, while,
as you would expect, the children’s programme directs its activities for children, whilst, at the same
time, also providing a place for parents to come together. Although located on the Bidston Rise
housing estate in a building provided and maintained by the housing association and the landlord,
services are available to anyone living in the Metropolitan Borough of Wirral and beyond. Jane, one
of the volunteers said, “It serves everybody. We have people come from Chester and everywhere
here. Nobody is ever turned away. People are helped if they need it. I’ve helped with many
projects over the years, but this one is the most fantastic ever.” Core Project is located in an area
characterised by extremely high rates of unemployment and high deprivation in a number of
categories, including income, employment and health.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|59
A key feature of the project is the way that it is self-organised by volunteers. While their goal is to
help the community with specific needs, it is difficult to draw a line between service users and
volunteers, as many volunteer in one area, but are a service user in another or even the same area.
It is also clear that volunteering provides important benefits for those who get involved. Jane
explains how the volunteering can help to level
differences between people.
“What makes us different is the fact that we
are all volunteers together. It’s not a
paycheque to anyone of us.” Volunteering
also provides structure and purpose. For
example, Ellie, who has really struggled since
her mother died, said, "It’s helped me, doing
my volunteering. Otherwise, I’d be sitting at
home. I came for a cup of coffee and never
really left.”
How FareShare food supports Core Project.
Core Project receives food from FareShare three times a week, alongside food from His Church and
directly from some retailers as part of FareShare Go as well as other schemes. This food is used in
the food parcels and for the children’s cooking activities, as a way to get rid of excess, but its main
purpose is to stock the social supermarket that operates on a Friday and was started two years ago.
Items are priced individually but are discounted compared to the supermarket cost because they are
surplus.
The supermarket is open from noon, but people start showing up at about ten in the morning to
meet friends and have a cup of tea or coffee, with maybe a scone or a bit of cake. The coordinator
reported that people are using this as an opportunity to learn about each other and make friends.
She pointed to two houses on opposite corners and said that the residents had lived in those houses
for ten years but had never spoken until they started coming to the social supermarket. People talk
about why they need to use the supermarket and what the benefits they get from it are.
The people who use the supermarket include those who are fully supported by benefits as well as
those who have jobs, including jobs with zero-hour contracts. It is clear that people are struggling by
the stories that the project coordinator tells. She said:
“We have people who are working who are struggling because they have to pay for
everything; full rent, full council tax, school lunches. You find that we have a lot of people
who work and come in and say they couldn’t feed their families and put the electric on… We
have one lady who comes in, and, when she first started coming to the social supermarket,
we’d be like ‘Oh God, here she comes!’ But, then you get talking to her, and you hear her
story and about her life. This lady is literally right to the penny on what she spends. She
plans her meals out as she walks around. We are on the top of her list for her shopping and
she does most of it with us. She told us she has three kids, her husband walked out and left
her with nothing, no food. She said there were weeks where she would have two tins of
beans and ‘I would have to make that work between the three kids and go days and days
without eating because I’d have to make sure that they did. And I swore that, once I got back
on my feet, I’d never let that happen again. ‘So, I’ve got my money that I can spend on
groceries, my money to spend on this, we never eat out. We don’t call in a chippy, if we’re
going to eat pizza, we make it at home, we literally plan our meals down to the last penny.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|60
So, by using a social supermarket I can also afford to give them a treat.’ So, she gets her fruit
and veg, and she plans her meals right down to the last penny to the puddings. And then it’s
‘okay I can get them a treat’. And you will see her, she’s got all her money in little bags and
this is the money for groceries, ‘let me see what I’ve got left.’”
For the director, this story is also one that illustrates the ability to feel in control of one’s life,
particularly in a circumstance where much of the control is taken away. It is also clear that, for the
woman described above, having access to the supermarket is not just a financial benefit, it enables
her to provide treats for her children that help her to express love and care; it gives structure to her
day and, on top of what, she has a place to meet and talk to other adults.
There is a dignity to this model of support as well. The director said, “You’re not just giving a service,
you’re building people’s morale. You’re making them still feel like they’re something when they
come in. And you really do build relationships.” To illustrate this point, she spoke of a woman who
worked full time, but has two autistic children, and her benefits were cut in the migration to
Universal Credit. This woman was initially sceptical and very embarrassed. However, the volunteers
told her there was nothing to be embarrassed about because she was still paying for her groceries
and that she should just think of it as a discount store. The director said the woman sent a three-
page message about how she got home after this first visit and “literally cried as she put away the
food, knowing that for the next month she could feed her kids, she has a roof over her head and she
can pay for the heat.” Importantly, this woman expressed a sentiment often expressed by those
who are struggling financially and the charity and community workers who support them. Namely,
there is often guilt conveyed at being the recipient of support because many of those on the
receiving end also know that there are many others who may be in a worse situation.
The discussions with the volunteers revealed that, while the food from the pantry gets people in the
door, this often leads to participation in other activities. For example, some started out coming to
the social supermarket and now come to the older people’s bingo too. Those at Core Project see
this as the real achievement, because the combination of different activities and opportunities to
engage is bringing people together to create a community that supports each other. It is clear that,
when the community group needs people to help with an activity, people do help.
After people have collected their groceries from the supermarket,
Core Project works hard to ensure that nothing is wasted. One of
the key ways in which they use the foods not sold is through a
children’s cooking club. Potatoes and carrots are particularly foods
that become surplus and so they are incorporated into healthy
eating and cooking. They then take the food they have prepared
home to be cooked in the oven. The director said, “We’ve got the
kids coming in here and cooking their family’s meals, but not only
that, the kids will eat those meals with all the veg in because they
have prepared it.” Parents are reporting that there is no way their
children would have eaten the food if they had prepared it because
of the vegetables it includes.
For some children, parents come along, and are able to talk to each
other while the children cook, which is important for ‘the mums’. For some, however, their parents
are not able to come along because of work commitments or having other very young children, but
the older children are able to come alone. This is important because, firstly, it enables the family to
have a hot meal, but it also keeps the child occupied in an activity that is productive and safe.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|61
Funding for Core Project is very limited and much of what they do is enabled by the time that
volunteers are willing to provide and the fact that they have stable access to premises. The staff and
volunteers at Core Project are the ones that deliver the activities and engage with the residents.
Because they provide a mix of activities, synergies happen that help to reduce isolation and
loneliness across a range of different groups of people with a range of intersecting circumstances.
The fact that they can access food at a low cost is also crucial. Food is central to what they do, and
they would not be able to offer many of the specific activities that they do offer if they were
required to purchase the food that they use
How can FareShare further support Core Project?
Core project felt that they have an excellent relationship with FareShare. They said, “We love
working with FareShare.” Core Project staff also feel that, if there is an issue or they need
something, they can just pick up the phone and easily talk to the staff at the warehouse. They are
aware that surplus food is not steady and commented that they understand that even FareShare can
struggle sometimes getting the food donations in. While they would like the membership to cost
less, this is mostly because they would like more food and getting a further delivery is not possible
on the budget that they have. With regard to specific items that they would like more of, meat,
cheese and dairy are their preferences.
They felt that the network could be used to support business development and that some sort of
recognitions scheme would help with access to funding. They were careful to mention that they did
not want to blow their own horn or a win a ‘golden globe’. They saw this as virtue signalling and a bit
of an ego trip. They did feel, however, that some sharing of good practice across the network would
be really useful, seeing it as an opportunity to find others who are facing similar issues and be able
to understand how they solved them, including issues around too much need in their communities.
Case study research conducted by Lucy Antal
Case study written by Megan Blake and Lucy Antal
January 2020.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|62
FareShare-British Red Cross
Whitefoot and Downham Community Food Plus
Lewisham East
Key messages from the case study
• Social exclusion and isolation arises from a host of sources, including poverty. Sometimes
mental and physical health problems within households can contribute to poverty, and
vice versa, which further exacerbates isolation.
• How support is provided and the way that food spaces are configured makes a huge
difference to the experience of accessing a service that can, initially, feel quite stigmatising
because it highlights an inability to support oneself. Creating a caring, supportive and
positive space can overcome such feelings and enable people to interact with each other.
• Food is at the centre of what WDCFplus does within its community. It gets people through
the door because it serves an immediate need, but it also means they receive the other
support they need to address the deeper issues.
• FareShare provides food categories that give people a more rounded diet and access to
fresh food that they would struggle to purchase on their own. This food best supports this
community when it is available in amounts that they can carry home.
What is Whitefoot and Downham Community Food +
In 2013, ward councillor Janet Daby (now MP for Lewisham East) saw a need in her community and
set about trying to fix it. She recognised needs arising from deprivation and wanted to be prepared
for the impact of the Welfare Act on her community. She saw that there were going to be real issues
associated from benefits changes, most notably involving the Spare Room Subsidy and the then as
yet forthcoming Universal Credit. People in her area were already reporting difficulties arising out of
debt and she saw many families who were struggling to feed themselves. She heard stories from
residents in the area talking about the difficulties about having to choose between electricity and
food, about children going to school hungry. In essence, she saw a community that was breaking
apart.
To address this issue, Janet brought together leaders
from six churches of different denominations, a local
social enterprise, and those with experience in
supporting people who may be struggling with mental,
physical or social issues, that, alongside poverty,
isolate them from being able to function sufficiently
within mainstream society. They set about creating a
project aimed to build resilience within the
community. Specifically, the vision was to create a
way of reconnecting that community so that everyone could work together to provide a way people
could achieve, prosper and reach their potential, while, at the same time, alleviate the immediate
stress of hunger that was preventing this from happening. Together, this group created a foodbank,
providing emergency food support to struggling families that now sits alongside other services that
offer advice and signposting. Since its inception, WDCFplus has won an All-Party Parliamentary
Group Paul Goggins Award for being the UK’s best civil society initiative that can demonstrate that it
has reduced poverty in a tangible way.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|63
While the food support, which is free to those who access it, addresses an immediate need for the
households that receive it, a central purpose of the initiative is to make real, tangible change in
people’s lives and to do so with as little stigma as possible. Although accessing a foodbank is in itself
stigmatising for many, WDCFplus has organised the way people move through the food project to
enable them to connect with others, choose the foods that they want to take home and access the
services they need such that, by the end of the process, they feel empowered, cared for and
supported.
Each week, approximately 60 visitors from within a two-mile radius collect food for roughly 150
people. Visitors can self-refer or are referred by a GP or other service provider. They start their
journey in a welcome area where volunteers offer a cup of tea or coffee and a biscuit. This area is
separate from where the food is collected and, on our visit, was quiet. People sat in chairs with their
drink, waiting to be called into the reception area. Although I did not observe people talking to each
other, the director said that people who have come before do start chatting once they get to know
each other. What was clearly observable was that people looked somewhat defeated. The director
agreed and said, “You do see some people that are really quite sad and a bit down. They probably
have not had a very good day. They have lots of worries on themselves or are in their own world,
but by the time they leave, you do see a transition in them.”
The next stage is the reception area. Here, each person talks to a volunteer who takes their details
and discusses their needs. Although not particularly private, they are one-to-one conversations.
Visitors are also asked about other issues that they may need support with and directed to speak to
services that are present on the evening. Importantly, austerity cuts have meant that some services
that were available when the project started are no longer being provided, which means WDFM has
to continuously search for third sector organisations that can help fill the gaps. Additional services
include health and nutrition advice, housing advice, debt advice, mental health support; benefits
appeal support, parenting support, and a time bank for people to exchange skills such as computer
training or childcare.
Listening to some of these conversations, one is stuck by the dignity of the exchanges and the way
that volunteers remember specifics about those who had been to the centre before with them
asking after a relative’s or pet’s health, for example, or if they had been able to solve a problem that
had presented previously. Donald, one of the directors, said, “Generally there are other plus points
to this project in terms of actually reaching out to people who feel a bit isolated or detached from
the community. You find that is where the mental health (intersects). Many of the visitors have
mental health background issues. It works for them if we always maintain a positive, easy-going
atmosphere. We have to get rid of that stigma.” They shared a story of one older woman who had
multiple physical health issues for which she received disability support. Changes in the system
resulted in her benefits being cut significantly, which meant she could not afford to purchase food.
The stress of her financial situation and the shame that this created led to depression and,
eventually, a GP visit, which resulted in a referral to WDCFplus. Breaking the barriers down and
building people, back up is done through the ongoing discussions people have with volunteers and
each other every time they come in.
Starting with non-perishables and then moving on to perishable food, and from there to the
community links area, people move through with their trolleys or bags within which they put the
food that they collect, and there is a great deal of choice. People are also encouraged to stay and
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|64
talk after they collect their food. The atmosphere here is friendly with people talking to both the
volunteers and each other.
As people move through this process, changes in their demeanour begin to occur, as the director
had indicated. The space becomes noisy with people engaging with each other and making jokes
about how their neighbours are going to think they are posh because they have food that they
would not normally be able to purchase, and which is not available within their area because there is
no local demand (e.g., bar-b-que ribs, quail eggs, aubergines). People are connecting with each other
and leaving feeling more positive because of these exchanges. For example, two women who had
just met that evening were talking about the difficulties they were having with the local school and
their children. As they walked out, they continued to chat and moved on to discuss some other
event within the community. As they said their goodbyes, one turned to the other and said, “I am
really glad to have met you tonight. I don’t really know that many people.” The other agreed.
Unfortunately, WDFCplus is at capacity in terms of the number of people they can support and still
ensure that these conversations take place.
Volunteers also benefit from the service. There are about 50
volunteers who support the project and who come from the
community and beyond. Some are city workers, some were
previous service users, others are retired, some are local and
some travel to help. Volunteers commented on the fact that
this gave them a regular purposeful activity that they can do in
their community and a chance to have a conversation.
However, with increasing numbers accessing the service, some
felt that this opportunity to interact and chat is being
diminished. Some of the volunteers are youth offenders who are encouraged to come to help them
find new social networks as a way to shift them towards a better path and help prevent them
becoming socially isolated further down the line. It is clear that the chance to be part of this project
is creating benefit for all who volunteer, and WDCFplus acknowledges this as a key mechanism for
fostering a safe, healthy and caring community. The volunteers are a community of people who are
supported with training opportunities (e.g., cooking and food handling skills, first aid, etc.) and the
project will issue certificates recognising volunteers’ contribution, which some have used to provide
evidence for successful job applications.
Finally, WDCFplus organises events such as community barbecues and a
Christmas meal for both visitors and volunteers. These events are helping
to address the isolation and the loneliness that is felt by some of the
volunteers. For example the director told a story of two volunteers where
were chatting at one of the social events. “They found that they lived next
door to each other. It's like that. All of a sudden, it dawned on them that,
actually, they've got lots more about them, that they knew each other.
That's the point, I suppose, that this works in the context of trying to build
communities, although sometimes it's not a very-- what's the word? You
can't put your finger on it, but you can see that come to fruition.”
WDFCplus fosters a giving ethos and you see that in the volunteers and the
visitors. Some visitors mentioned they were very grateful for the food, but
that they were lucky because they still have a place to live while others are worse off. The visitors,
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|65
for example, often become volunteers once they no longer are in need, or bring in something for the
volunteers to eat by way of saying thank you.
How FareShare supports Whitefoot and Downham Community Food +.
Initially, food support for WDCFplus was received from Esther Community Enterprise, which sources
food from supermarket warehouses and community donations from individuals and schools. More
recently, FareShare has also begun to supply food. This creates a food offer that includes staple
tinned and canned goods, bread products, meats, dairy, a large array of vegetables, tea, coffee and a
few treats. The person in charge of the food orders said that the biggest benefit from FareShare was
access to meat products, which they could not get elsewhere on a regular basis.
WDCFplus could not operate without the food that they supply being free to families and FareShare
contributes to this. It is not saving them money, because, without FareShare food, they would
operate using other sources, as they currently do, or they would simply have to offer less food. They
would not spend the money purchasing replacements for what they receive from FareShare. They
did say, however, that, if they are short on jam, coffee, sugar, cooking oil (in family size containers),
milk or biscuits, they will purchase these, which they reckon works out as an expenditure of about
£50 per week. These foods are not items they receive from FareShare.
What more can Fare Share do to support Whitefood and Downham Community Food +?
WDCFplus said they had generally a good relationship with the FareShare warehouse and would
happily take all kinds of food, provided they can use it. The food manager commented that they
receive quite a number of catering size items, which is problematic. For example, when they get
catering packs of pasta or giant bags of rice, they will divide these up into smaller bundles that
people can carry home. If, however, they receive a catering sized jug of oil, ketchup, or mayonnaise
they must pass this on to a community organisation that cooks meals. They also commented that, if
they could receive items that they currently have to purchase, in sizes that people can carry home,
this would save them money.
It was clear from the discussions that I had with WDCFplus volunteers and staff that they see
FareShare as merely one of their sources of food, because that is what the relationship has been.
The prospect of information sharing about good practice was also discussed with the director.
WDCFplus did a lot of initial work before setting up the food bank to understand what the different
models of food banks are and what the different approaches were. Having easier access to what
these different options might be, the pros and cons of each, lessons learnt, and the cost would be
helpful for those starting from scratch.
The director thought signposting to other charities who are doing these different approaches would
also be helpful to be able to talk through what works and what does not. For example, WDCFplus
are currently looking at ways that they can build more community engagement activities around the
food support work that they already do. A community garden is one thing they are considering as a
way that might help with this, and it would be nice to be able to talk to some organisations that are
currently running successful growing projects. Health and nutrition activities are also something they
are considering, but they want to ensure that it fits with the ethos of what they already do and does
not reproduce narratives of stigma and inability.
WDCFplus is very aware of the importance of their volunteers and is keen to ensure that they offer
adequate support to them. Signposting or sharing best practice around volunteer development is a
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|66
further area of information that FareShare might consider facilitating, either online as information
sheets, via a discussion forum, or through a conference type event.
One of the key difficulties that WDCFplus faces is ensuring that there is an adequate variety of
support on offer for people to access with service providers who are outgoing and engaging. The
community nurse who was there, for example, was not going out of her way to engage in
conversation with those who were visitors, whereas other providers were much more proactive.
Given recent austerity cuts, having a forum where charities can ask for contacts to services would
make their job less difficult.
They felt an annual networking and showcasing conference would be good for networking with
similar charities, learning about how other organisations are dealing with issues to do with food
access and innovating their services, and find new ways of working together. There was some
concern that the sector is full of competition and, in response to this, activities fostering cooperation
is needed.
Finally, they thought opportunities for being recognised for the good work that organisations do
would be useful for those who rely heavily on grant funding. The basis for thinking this is because,
when WDCFplus was recognised with their national award, this helped them to secure funding from
other sources. However, the director was clear he wanted to avoid something that looked like an
‘Ofsted rating’.
Case study research conducted by Megan Blake
Case study written by Megan Blake
December 2019
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|67
FareShare-British Red Cross
Café 43, House of Bread
Stafford
Key messages from the case study
• Isolation and loneliness can arise from a lack of access to the material elements needed to
live everyday life, such as a home and food. This case study also shows that this extends
to the inability to participate in reciprocal exchanges, such as sharing a meal or giving a
gift, and opportunities for interaction in spaces that are welcoming.
• Food can be used in many ways to tackle loneliness and Isolation. The case study reveals
the way food is used to create opportunities for people with complex issues and situations
that isolate them from mainstream society enabling them to mix on equal terms to engage
socially with people from a range of backgrounds. Access to a steady supply of high quality
food is a key facilitator of this, because it helps to bring in a range of people.
• The steady supply and variety of food provided to them is a resource that they cannot
afford, and, as such, the café and the food bags would not exist without this food, which,
in turn, would limit who comes through the door. Because they can offer these food-
based services, they are also able to provide additional support and volunteering
opportunities to a larger number of people who are often excluded.
• Receiving this supply of food from FareShare saves time. What this means is that they do
not have to find and maintain relationships with a range of donors and collect food from
different locations. Instead, they can spend this time doing the activities that directly
support and enable the interactions of those who come to Café 43 and House of Bread.
What is House of Bread and Café 43?
The House of Bread (House of Bread) and Café 43 were set up by Will and Jack to help, in Jack’s
words, make those people who are invisible in today’s society, visible. The House of Bread part of
the combo aims to support vulnerable and homeless people to be able to be part of ordinary
everyday life and have opportunities to mix with members of the public on similar terms. Three
groups of people engage with House of Bread. There are volunteers who help keep the activities
going; these may be people who just want to help out, or people who started out as regular visitors.
Regular visitors, which they refer to as friends, are those who may be struggling with drug and/or
alcohol abuse, may be homeless or struggle on a very low income, and may be current or ex-
offenders. Friends are people who use the services and the café, but do not volunteer in the day-to-
day running of the organisation. There is also an in-between group called helpers, who are more
than just friends, but might not yet be able to take on the full role of a volunteer and are supported
in that space to progress towards becoming a volunteer. While House of Bread is a charity that helps
these people, they have chosen to emphasise Café 43 as a way of reducing stigma and to encourage
‘ordinary’ members of the public to come in as well as those in search of support. As a result, Café
43 is a space where people can put aside their different social statuses and interact. The café runs
on a Pay-As-You-Feel basis, which means that those who do not have money to buy their food are
able to access the café.
What is now House of Bread and Café 43 originally started as an open meal 10 years ago. As need
increased, they added a food bank that provides weekly food bags, which the police say has reduced
crime in the area on the days that it is offered. They now do food bags on Tuesday, Wednesday and
Thursday. There is a range of bags that are designed to support different types of households
depending on their needs and capacities. Before receiving food from FareShare, all food was
donated from members of the public or from local businesses, whom they approached for support.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|68
The ethos that underpins how House of Bread remains sustainable is that it should be entirely
community supported. They will trade and barter to get what they need and they have developed an
excellent network that supports these needs. They do not take funding from outside sources
because they do not want to be tied to external agendas. They want the freedom to be able to
‘speak truth to power’.
On Friday’s they run Bread Church – a food activity of making and
baking bread from 10am until 2pm with a simple lunch of soup for
participants, “where people come along, make two loaves of bread,
one to keep and one to give away. And, for a person who has nothing,
who lives in a tent or not even a tent, to go away and give to someone
else is absolutely massive. It’s a huge positive thing because up to that
point, all they’ve been doing is taking, taking and accepting help and
then suddenly they are able to give something to someone else.” The
ability to engage in reciprocal relationships is an important part of
maintaining friendships.
The café is the front end of the establishment and acts as a pivot point
between those who are struggling and marginalised and those who represent
mainstream society. The café operates three days a week – Tuesdays,
Wednesdays and Thursdays and its purpose is to get the public to come and spend
money. This not only helps with the sustainability of the organisation but is
especially important because it normalises the space. For example they said, “If
somebody comes in, spends some money on food and then sits on the same table
as one of our friends, suddenly they’re not getting free handouts, they’re just
enjoying something that somebody else who’s got something can enjoy as well”.
This is contrary to the typical experience of those who are unable to pay, which is
being asked to leave. Not having spaces within which to socialise is a key
contributor to isolation. Importantly the quality of the food plays a key role in
maintaining this social mix. They said, “It’s so important that that quality of food
is there otherwise the general public wouldn’t want to come in.”
Café 43 is also supporting people to be able to maintain and rebuild bridges with their families. It
provides safe spaces for homeless parents to spend time with their children. For example, Mark
who was previously homeless and has MS. He is also divorced with two children. Mark now lives in
sheltered accommodation, but he cannot have the children to visit where he lives. The café offers a
space for him to meet and spend time with his children. It is also helping to prop up an
underfunded social support system, which needs propping up in the current national political
context.
Alongside the food and related activities, House of Bread provides Citizens Advice with a desk. They
run Craft Hands once a week, making art and crafts and have previously run games clubs and music
quizzes. Jack went on to explain, “Essentially, what we do here is to create a social environment.
Before, it was about getting people that food, who were desperate and at a point of crisis; now it’s a
real social place.” House of Bread also works with Drake Hall female prison, offering inmates on
licence in their last year the opportunity to come to the café and re-socialise as volunteers as part of
the Through the Gate programme. Developing new social networks plays an important role in
preventing re-offending. They are hoping to create a triage nursing station, for their visitors who do
not have the capacity or desire to engage with a statutory healthcare system. They also are working
to get drop-in support from Women’s Aid.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|69
One key point that Will made was that they are absolutely not sustaining a poor lifestyle for
vulnerable people nor are they giving government a free pass to withdraw support. In addition to
advocating for the homeless with local and national ministers around housing support, they provide
a platform for those who are homeless to tell their own stories. They have worked with Channel 4 to
highlight the lives of homeless people in Stafford, some of
whom have now died. House of Bread is just there “to
help people”. They have won the Queen’s Award for
Voluntary Services.
Will also goes to schools to talk about not just what they
are doing in their community, but also about the
importance of a circular economy. His aim is to ensure
there is a next generation of people who are community
focused and understand the importance of passing
forward and giving back. Which, in the longer term, will reduce the expansion of isolation and high
rates of loneliness that we are currently seeing.
How FareShare food supports House of Bread
House of Bread is an excellent CFM because they are willing to take all that is offered, including
items that other charities in the area cannot or do not want to take. They also have capacity to take
this food at a second’s notice, as their warehouse is filled with rescued freezers and fridges. Jack
said, “We wouldn’t be here if we didn’t have that food from FareShare….From day to day, if we had
to go and spend money on the quality of food we’re giving out, we wouldn’t be here. And certainly
people wouldn’t be coming in. People wouldn’t be saying how nice it is. So yes, everything that
happens here is down to that. The only thing we spend money on is milk.” Importantly, while Jack
frames this as a cost saving, it is not money saved so much as it is time, as the food they used prior
to receiving food from FareShare was donations from local businesses and residents. While some
donations happen because people feel willing to give, maintaining donations consistently over time
requires maintaining relationships with the donor, which takes time. Often donors have to be
sought out, which also takes time. While an organisation may have a good relationship with a
particular store or restaurant manager, if that person moves on the relationship often also must be
redeveloped. FareShare takes this relationship development work and uncertainty out of the
equation. It also centralises the collection into one single point, whereas multiple donors also
means multiple sites to visit from which to collect food. What the convenience of working with
FareShare enables is the ability to spend less time getting the food and more time doing the front-
line activities that are supporting people to be able to connect to each other and provide the
support they need to change their circumstances.
In addition to offering high quality food in the café, House of Bread has also been able to improve
their food bags that they give to those who are struggling to afford food. These bags include tins
donated from the public, but also fresh chilled and frozen food, such as convenience meals, meats,
fruits and vegetables. The food in the café and in the bags has the capacity to get people in the
door so that they will access other support. “It does show that food is just the beginning, because it
doesn’t matter how often you give someone a food bag, the food here, the food bag isn’t going to
stop someone taking drugs or help their mental health or help them get a job; what will do it is the
interaction with our case workers and our volunteers whilst they are eating that food.”
This high-quality food is also making a difference to people’s ability to cope and to recover from the
conditions within which they are living. “The other by-product of FareShare is our ability to supply
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|70
fresh good quality food. They are eating well, so they sleep well, so they are able to make informed
decisions. You see it. So people can say I’ve been eating and sleeping, so now I can have a
conversation about where I want to go and what I want to do; you can’t have that conversation with
someone who’s hungry or hasn’t eaten consistently.” Here the food is enabling people to have the
mental and physical capacity to connect with a wider social context.
The diversity of the surplus is generating conversations. Exposing people to foods that they would
not normally eat creates a conversation. Jack gave the example: “people come in and say what’s
that? It’s an aubergine, oh I don’t like that. Have you ever eaten one? No. Well that second bowl of
soup you’ve just eaten, that was aubergine.” House of Bread takes advantage of this divesity and
uses it to their advantage. “That’s why we always have soup on a Friday. We make bread and then,
while that’s cooking, we make soup. And we make it by colours because of all the different veg that
goes in there, but if you tell them veg is in there they won’t go near it. But I have the Dulux paint
chart app on my phone, which, if you point it at something, it tells you what the equivalent colour it
is on the Dulux colour app. So, last week, we had Mexican Mosaic soup. But it’s great. If I was to tell
someone there was marrow in it….” By using foods creatively, such as the colour-based soups and
tweeting about them, Jack has also managed to leverage paint from Dulux.
About the location
Stafford is the county town of Staffordshire in the West Midlands. Situated within 24 miles of
Birmingham, and between Wolverhampton and Stoke on Trent,
Stafford is a commuter town with a population of around 134,000. It
has an attractive historical centre with a mix of medieval and 17th C
buildings. Behind these is a traditional mid 20thC high street, with the
usual chains and a noticeable number of closed retail outlets. Stafford
looks prosperous on first inspection, with the public sector providing
local employment with Staffordshire County Council, Stafford Borough
Council, Stafford Police HQ, Stafford Prison, County Hospital and
Beacon Barracks all housed within the town. Scratch the surface,
though, and a different picture emerges. There are fewer children and
people of working age compared to the rest of England and more people aged over 65. This has led
to an increased demand on public sector funded services, with a higher than national average of
adults using health and social care services. Life expectancy has increased, but years in good health
have declined with men and women spending 15 and 17 years in poor health, respectively. More
people are admitted to hospital as a result of drinking too much alcohol. Housing affordability is also
an issue in Stafford and more households live in fuel poverty (more than one in ten households)
5
House of Bread is located down a side street, just off the main centre of the town, near the high
security prison. The House of Bread logo hangs subtly outside the building and is hung like a pub
sign. The main focus at the entrance is for the companion eatery, Café 43, with bright blackboards
with opening times, information on the pay-as-you-feel (PAYF) aspect and a welcome. The building is
a converted pharmacy, prior to which it was a pub. House of Bread has been there for three years.
In that time, the father and son team that set it up, Will and Jack Morris, have transformed the
building into a multi-purpose space. There is a café and kitchen with a counter as you walk in – lots
5
https://www.staffordbc.gov.uk/sites/default/files/cme/DocMan1/Corporate%20Business%20and%20Partne
rships/Stafford-Locality-Profile-2018.pdf accessed 2.11.19
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|71
of six-seater tables dotted about to encourage socialisation, plus quieter corners with computers
and a room that is set aside for children, filled with games, bright toys, bedding, clothes and more.
On arrival, people sit at the tables and there is lots of chatting. All are welcomed by Jack and offered
a cuppa.
Further information about some of the eaters who attend House of Bread & Café 43
Mark
Mark has recently been diagnosed with MS and was
attending the Bread Church activity with his two young sons.
Mark was previously homeless and has been attending
House of Bread for the past two years. He has progressed
from a friend to a helper and expressed an ambition to
become a volunteer. He has a room nearby but is not able to
have his children to stay over. He expressed sadness over
this but reiterated that it was good he could bring his boys to
the café when he has care of them. Mark comes to House of
Bread every day it is open, and finds the support given very good for his mental health as it gives him
people to talk to and turn to.
Andrea
Andrea is a young mum of four sons, aged between under 1 and 10. She is bright and articulate, and
was previously an events manager and had a comfortable standard of living. However, Andrea is a
survivor of domestic abuse, leaving her partner a year ago. She arrived in Stafford a few months
ago, having moved several times with her children, which has meant that she no longer has her
friendship networks from her previous life and has to start over and in difficult circumstances. She is
on the priority list for council assisted housing but is currently renting privately. Her partner left her
with significant debt, which she is slowly paying off. After paying her rent, utility bills and child-
related expenses, she is left with £50 a month to feed herself and the boys. She said, “if you visited
my home, you wouldn’t know, but my cupboards are empty.” When people do not have money for
food, they also do not have money to socialise. One child has also been diagnosed with Asperger’s
Syndrome, which can be challenging, particularly without a support system. Coming to the café is a
break from being at home. Both she and the children are able to meet other people, and, for her,
the opportunity to interact with other adults helps her to feel more connected to wider society.
Andrea spoke candidly about her situation and her experience of visiting Café 43 and the House of
Bread. She appreciates the non-judgemental, friendly welcome she received on her first and
subsequent visits. She is a good and keen cook and enjoys the varied mix of foods she is able to
access from the cafe.
Rachel
Rachel is a woman in her mid-40s. She is in recovery but declined to go into detail. She visits House
of Bread every week, especially for Bread Church, as she enjoys making bread and being able to give
a loaf away to someone else. She has been attending House of Bread activities for five years and
spoke of being on a spiritual journey where she receives advice and support. She has a main meal at
the café on the days it is open. She doesn’t cook much at home, she prefers to come to the café for
the social aspect. Her family has moved away from the area, back to Wales, so, without House of
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|72
Bread, she would be isolated. She mentioned that her mum said she was “glad you’ve got that place
to go to.”
Jane and Clare
Jane and Clare work for the local authority in child protection and had come to the House of Bread
to pick up a food parcel for a family at risk. They spoke about the irony of the third sector supporting
statutory provision due to austerity and that they, as a service, “couldn’t function without them”, as
it was helping to support 200 families, and it was so much “more than a food bank”. They described
the services offered by House of Bread as non-threatening, comfortable and somewhere they
personally like to visit. On our visit, they were having a quiet cup of tea and chatting to other visitors.
How FareShare could further support House of Bread and Café 43
This organisation has a good relationship with FareShare, they have a delivery every two weeks and
they embrace the notion of zero waste, with audit trails of where the food has come to, and how it is
used. FareShare might consider supporting them with more work around the positive message of
food support and what a resource surplus food can be, rather than a focus on the surplus food for
hungry people message. It was clear that Jack and Will can demonstrate that surplus is “all good
food and should be eaten by everyone” – the café is an example of how they are integrating people;
it is not just the dispossessed and vulnerable.
Will and Jack are excellent networkers and are keen to get their message out to others. They are
creative and inventive in how they meet the needs of their community. They would benefit from
being able to share their resources and learn from what others are similarly doing.
Case Study Research conducted by Lucy Antal, October/November 2019
Case study written by Lucy Antal and Megan Blake
November 2019
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|73
FareShare-British Red Cross
Whitefoot and Downham Community Food Plus
Lewisham East
Key messages from the case study
• Social exclusion and isolation arises from a host of sources, including poverty. Sometimes
mental and physical health problems within households can contribute to poverty, and
vice versa, which further exacerbates isolation.
• How support is provided and the way that food spaces are configured makes a huge
difference to the experience of accessing a service that can, initially, feel quite stigmatising
because it highlights an inability to support oneself. Creating a caring, supportive and
positive space can overcome such feelings and enable people to interact with each other.
• Food is at the centre of what WDCFplus does within its community. It gets people through
the door because it serves an immediate need, but it also means they receive the other
support they need to address the deeper issues.
• FareShare provides food categories that give people a more rounded diet and access to
fresh food that they would struggle to purchase on their own. This food best supports this
community when it is available in amounts that they can carry home.
What is Whitefoot and Downham Community Food +
In 2013, ward councillor Janet Daby (now MP for Lewisham East) saw a need in her community and
set about trying to fix it. She recognised needs arising from deprivation and wanted to be prepared
for the impact of the Welfare Act on her community. She saw that there were going to be real issues
associated from benefits changes, most notably involving the Spare Room Subsidy and the then as
yet forthcoming Universal Credit. People in her area were already reporting difficulties arising out of
debt and she saw many families who were struggling to feed themselves. She heard stories from
residents in the area talking about the difficulties about having to choose between electricity and
food, about children going to school hungry. In essence, she saw a community that was breaking
apart.
To address this issue, Janet brought together leaders
from six churches of different denominations, a local
social enterprise, and those with experience in
supporting people who may be struggling with mental,
physical or social issues, that, alongside poverty,
isolate them from being able to function sufficiently
within mainstream society. They set about creating a
project aimed to build resilience within the
community. Specifically, the vision was to create a
way of reconnecting that community so that everyone could work together to provide a way people
could achieve, prosper and reach their potential, while, at the same time, alleviate the immediate
stress of hunger that was preventing this from happening. Together, this group created a foodbank,
providing emergency food support to struggling families, which sits alongside other services that
offer advice and signposting. Since its inception, WDCFplus has won an All Party Parliamentary
Group Paul Goggins Award for being the UK’s best civil society initiative that can demonstrate that it
has reduced poverty in a tangible way.
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|74
While the food support, which is free to those who access it, addresses an immediate need for the
households that receive it, a central purpose of the initiative is to make real, tangible change in
people’s lives and to do so with as little stigma as possible. Although accessing a foodbank is in itself
stigmatising for many, WDCFplus has organised the way people move through the food project to
enable them to connect with others, choose the foods that they want to take home and access the
services they need such that, by the end of the process, they feel empowered, cared for and
supported.
Each week, approximately 60 visitors from within a two-mile radius collect food for roughly 150
people. Visitors can self-refer or are referred by a GP or other service provider. They start their
journey in a welcome area where volunteers offer a cup of tea or coffee and a biscuit. This area is
separate from where the food is collected and, on our visit, was quiet. People sat in chairs with their
drink, waiting to be called into the reception area. Although I did not observe people talking to each
other, the director said that people who have come before do start chatting once they get to know
each other. What was clearly observable was that people looked somewhat defeated. The director
agreed and said, “You do see some people that are really quite sad and a bit down. They probably
have not had a very good day. They have lots of worries on themselves or are in their own world,
but, by the time they leave, you do see a transition in them.”
The next stage is the reception area. Here, each person talks to a volunteer who takes their details
and discusses their needs. Although not particularly private, they are one-to-one conversations.
Visitors are also asked about other issues that they may need support with and directed to speak to
services that are present on the evening. Importantly, austerity cuts have meant that some services
that were available when the project started are no longer being provided, which means WDFM has
to continuously search for third sector organisations that can help fill the gaps. Additional services
include health and nutrition advice, housing advice, debt advice, mental health support, benefits
appeal support, parenting support, and a time bank for people to exchange skills such as computer
training or childcare.
Listening to some of these conversations, one is stuck by the dignity of the exchanges and the way
that volunteers remember specifics about those who had been to the centre before with them
asking after a relative’s or pet’s health, for example, or if they had been able to solve a problem that
had presented previously. Donald, one of the directors, said, “Generally there are other plus points
to this project in terms of actually reaching out to people who feel a bit isolated or detached from
the community. You find that is where the mental health (intersects). A lot of the visitors have
mental health background issues. It works for them if we always maintain a positive, easy-going
atmosphere. We have to get rid of that stigma.” They shared a story of one older woman who had
multiple physical health issues for which she received disability support. Changes in the system
resulted in her benefits being cut significantly, which meant she could not afford to purchase food.
The stress of her financial situation and the shame that this created led to depression and,
eventually, a GP visit, which resulted in a referral to WDCFplus. Breaking the barriers down and
building people back up is done through the ongoing discussions people have with volunteers and
each other every time they come in.
Starting with non-perishables and then moving on to perishable food, and from there to the
community links area, people move through with their trolleys or bags within which they put the
food that they collect, and there is a great deal of choice. People are also encouraged to stay and
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|75
talk after they collect their food. The atmosphere here is friendly with people talking to both the
volunteers and each other.
As people move through this process, changes in their demeanour begin to occur, as the director
had indicated. The space becomes noisy with people engaging with each other and making jokes
about how their neighbours are going to think they are posh because they have food that they
would not normally be able to purchase, and which is not available within their area because there is
no local demand (e.g., bar-b-que ribs, quail eggs, aubergines). People are connecting with each other
and leaving feeling more positive because of these exchanges. For example, two women who had
just met that evening were talking about the difficulties they were having with the local school and
their children. As they walked out, they continued to chat and moved on to discuss some other
event within the community. As they said their goodbyes, one turned to the other and said, “I am
really glad to have met you tonight. I don’t really know that many people.” The other agreed.
Unfortunately, WDFCplus is at capacity in terms of the number of people they can support and still
ensure that these conversations take place.
Volunteers also benefit from the service. There are about 50
volunteers who support the project and who come from the
community and beyond. Some are city workers, some were
previous service users, others are retired, some are local and
some travel to help. Volunteers commented on the fact that
this gave them a regular purposeful activity that they can do in
their community and a chance to have a conversation.
However, with increasing numbers accessing the service, some
felt that this opportunity to interact and chat is being
diminished. Some of the volunteers are youth offenders who are encouraged to come to help them
find new social networks as a way to shift them towards a better path and help prevent them
becoming socially isolated further down the line. It is clear that the chance to be part of this project
is creating benefit for all who volunteer, and WDCFplus acknowledges this as a key mechanism for
fostering a safe, healthy and caring community. The volunteers are a community of people who are
supported with training opportunities (e.g., cooking and food handling skills, first aid, etc.) and the
project will issue certificates recognising volunteers’ contribution, which some have used to provide
evidence for successful job applications.
Finally, WDCFplus organises events such as community barbecues and a
Christmas meal for both visitors and volunteers. These events are helping to
address the isolation and the loneliness that is felt by some of the volunteers.
For example the director told a story of two volunteers where were chatting at
one of the social events. “They found that they lived next door to each other.
It's like that. All of a sudden, it dawned on them that, actually, they've got lots
more about them, that they knew each other. That's the point, I suppose, that
this works in the context of trying to build communities, although sometimes
it's not a very-- what's the word? You can't put your finger on it, but you can
see that come to fruition.”
WDFCplus fosters a giving ethos and you see that in the volunteers and the
visitors. Some visitors mentioned they were very grateful for the food, but that
they were lucky because they still have a place to live while others are worse off. The visitors, for
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|76
example, often become volunteers once they no longer are in need, or bring in something for the
volunteers to eat by way of saying thank you.
How FareShare supports Whitefoot and Downham Community Food +.
Initially, food support for WDCFplus was received from Esther Community Enterprise, which sources
food from supermarket warehouses and community donations from individuals and schools. More
recently, FareShare has also begun to supply food. This creates a food offer that includes staple
tinned and canned goods, bread products, meats, dairy, a large array of vegetables, tea, coffee and a
few treats. The person in charge of the food orders said that the biggest benefit from FareShare was
access to meat products, which they could not get elsewhere on a regular basis.
WDCFplus could not operate without the food that they supply being free to families and FareShare
contributes to this. It is not saving them money, because, without FareShare food, they would
operate using other sources, as they currently do, or they would simply have to offer less food. They
would not spend the money purchasing replacements for what they receive from FareShare. They
did say, however, that, if they are short on jam, coffee, sugar, cooking oil (in family size containers),
milk or biscuits, they will purchase these, which they reckon works out as an expenditure of about
£50 per week. These foods are not items they receive from FareShare.
What more can Fare Share do to support Whitefood and Downham Community Food +?
WDCFplus said they had generally a good relationship with the FareShare warehouse and would
happily take all kinds of food, provided they can use it. The food manager commented that they
receive quite a number of catering size items, which is problematic. For example, when they get
catering packs of pasta or giant bags of rice, they will divide these up into smaller bundles that
people can carry home. If, however, they receive a catering sized jug of oil, ketchup, or mayonnaise
they must pass this on to a community organisation that cooks meals. They also commented that, if
they could receive items that they currently have to purchase, in sizes that people can carry home,
this would save them money.
It was clear from the discussions that I had with WDCFplus volunteers and staff that they see
FareShare as merely one of their sources of food, because that is what the relationship has been.
The prospect of information sharing about good practice was also discussed with the director.
WDCFplus did a lot of initial work before setting up the food bank to understand what the different
models of food banks are and what the different approaches were. Having easier access to what
these different options might be, the pros and cons of each, lessons learnt and the cost would be
helpful for those starting from scratch.
The director thought signposting to other charities who are doing these different approaches would
also be helpful to be able to talk through what works and what does not. For example, WDCFplus
are currently looking at ways that they can build more community engagement activities around the
food support work that they already do. A community garden is one thing they are considering as a
way that might help with this, and it would be nice to be able to talk to some organisations that are
currently running successful growing projects. Health and nutrition activities are also something they
are considering, but they want to ensure that it fits with the ethos of what they already do and does
not reproduce narratives of stigma and inability.
WDCFplus is very aware of the importance of their volunteers and is keen to ensure that they offer
adequate support to them. Signposting or sharing best practice around volunteer development is a
Releasing Social Value from Surplus Food|77
further area of information that FareShare might consider facilitating, either online as information
sheets, via a discussion forum, or through a conference type event.
One of the key difficulties that WDCFplus faces is ensuring that there is an adequate variety of
support on offer for people to access with service providers who are outgoing and engaging. The
community nurse who was there, for example, was not going out of her way to engage in
conversation with those who were visitors, whereas other providers were much more proactive.
Given recent austerity cuts, having a forum where charities can ask for contacts to services would
make their job less difficult.
They felt an annual networking and showcasing conference would be good for networking with
similar charities, learning about how other organisations are dealing with issues to do with food
access and innovating their services, and find new ways of working together. There was some
concern that the sector is full of competition and, in response to this, activities fostering cooperation
is needed.
Finally, they thought opportunities for being recognised for the good work that organisations do
would be useful for those who rely heavily on grant funding. The basis for thinking this is because,
when WDCFplus was recognised with their national award, this helped them to secure funding from
other sources. However, the director was clear he wanted to avoid something that looked like an
‘Ofsted rating’.
Case study research conducted by Megan Blake
Case study written by Megan Blake
December 2019
